Downloaded 45 times
![69
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION VALUE RUBRIC [retrieved September 29, 2009 from
http://www.aacu.org/value/rubrics/index.cfm]
for more information, please contact value@aacu.org
Definition
Written communication is the development and expression of ideas in writing. Written communication involves learning to work in many genres and styles. It can
involve working with many different writing technologies, and mixing texts, data, and images. Written communication abilities develop through iterative
experiences across the curriculum.
Framing Language
This writing rubric is designed for use in a wide variety of educational institutions. The most clear finding to emerge from decades of research on writing
assessment is that the best writing assessments are locally determined and sensitive to local context and mission. Users of this rubric should, in the end, consider
making adaptations and additions that clearly link the language of the rubric to individual campus contexts.
This rubric focuses assessment on how specific written work samples or collections of work respond to specific contexts. The central question guiding the rubric is
"How well does writing respond to the needs of audience(s) for the work?" In focusing on this question the rubric does not attend to other aspects of writing that
are equally important: issues of writing process, writing strategies, writers' fluency with different modes of textual production or publication, or writer's growing
engagement with writing and disciplinarity through the process of writing.
Evaluators using this rubric must have information about the assignments or purposes for writing guiding writers' work. Also recommended is including reflective
work samples of collections of work that address such questions as: What decisions did the writer make about audience, purpose, and genre as s/he compiled the
work in the portfolio? How are those choices evident in the writing -- in the content, organization and structure, reasoning, evidence, mechanical and surface
conventions, and citational systems used in the writing? This will enable evaluators to have a clear sense of how writers understand the assignments and take it into
consideration as they evaluate.
The first section of this rubric addresses the context and purpose for writing. A work sample or collections of work can convey the context and purpose for the
writing tasks it showcases by including the writing assignments associated with work samples. But writers may also convey the context and purpose for their
writing within the texts. It is important for faculty and institutions to include directions for students about how they should represent their writing contexts and
purposes.
Faculty interested in the research on writing assessment that has guided our work here can consult the National Council of Teachers of English/Council of Writing
Program Administrators' White Paper on Writing Assessment
(2008; http://www.wpacouncil.org/whitepaper) and the Conference on College Composition and Communication's Writing Assessment: A Position Statement
(2008; http://www.ncte.org/cccc/resources/positions/123784.htm)](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/4-160822003253/85/4-1-rubric-workshop-handout-mary-allen-69-320.jpg)
![72
for more information, please contact value@aacu.org
Definition
Reading is "the process of simultaneously extracting and constructing meaning through interaction and involvement with written language" (Snow et
al, 2002). (From http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB8024/index1.html)
Framing Language
To paraphrase Phaedrus, texts do not explain, nor answer questions about, themselves. They must be located, approached, decoded, comprehended,
analyzed, interpreted, and discussed, especially complex academic texts used in college and university classrooms for purposes of learning.
Historically, college professors have not considered the teaching of reading necessary other than as a "basic skill" in which students may require
"remediation." They have assumed that students come with the ability to read and have placed responsibility for its absence on teachers in elementary
and secondary schools.
This absence of reading instruction in higher education must, can, and will change, and this rubric marks a direction for this change. Why the
change? Even the strongest, most experienced readers making the transition from high school to college have not learned what they need to know and
do to make sense of texts in the context of professional and academic scholarship--to say nothing about readers who are either not as strong or as
experienced. Also, readers mature and develop their repertoire of reading performances naturally during the undergraduate years and beyond as a
consequence of meeting textual challenges. This rubric provides some initial steps toward finding ways to measure undergraduate students' progress
along the continuum. Our intention in creating this rubric is to support and promote the teaching of undergraduates as readers to take on increasingly
higher levels of concerns with texts and to read as one of “those who comprehend.”
Readers, as they move beyond their undergraduate experiences, should be motivated to approach texts and respond to them with a reflective level of
curiosity and the ability to apply aspects of the texts they approach to a variety of aspects in their lives. This rubric provides the framework for
evaluating both students' developing relationship to texts and their relative success with the range of texts their coursework introduces them to. It is
likely that users of this rubric will detect that the cell boundaries are permeable, and the criteria of the rubric are, to a degree, interrelated.
Glossary
The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only.
• Analysis: The process of recognizing and using features of a text to build a more advanced understanding of the meaning of a text. (Might include
evaluation of genre, language, tone, stated purpose, explicit or implicit logic (including flaws of reasoning), and historical context as they
contribute to the meaning of a text.]
• Comprehension: The extent to which a reader "gets" the text, both literally and figuratively. Accomplished and sophisticated readers will have
moved from being able to "get" the meaning that the language of the text provides to being able to "get" the implications of the text, the questions it
raises, and the counterarguments one might suggest in response to it. A helpful and accessible discussion of 'comprehension' is found in Chapter 2
of the RAND report, Reading for Understanding: http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1465/MR1465.ch2.pdf.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/4-160822003253/85/4-1-rubric-workshop-handout-mary-allen-72-320.jpg)
Uploaded byYafi Azhari
4.1 rubric workshop handout mary allen
Using rubrics to assess student work provides several benefits: 1) Rubrics specify clear criteria for evaluating student performance on learning outcomes, guiding subjective judgments of student work. 2) Rubrics can be used to provide students with formative feedback to improve, as well as to assign grades. 3) Rubrics evaluate student work based on pre-defined criteria and standards rather than comparing students to each other.
More Related Content
Similar to 4.1 rubric workshop handout mary allen
4.1 rubric workshop handout mary allen
- 1. 1 Using Rubrics toGrade, Assess, and Improve Student Learning Strengthening Our Roots: Quality, Opportunity & Success Professional Development Day Miami-Dade College March 7, 2014 Mary J. Allen, mallen@csub.edu Academic Program Assessment Assessment is an on-going process designed to monitor and improve student learning. Faculty: develop explicit statements of what students should learn (student learning outcomes) require students to perform each outcome assess how well students performed each outcome use results to improve student learning of each outcome (close the loop) Assessing the Evidence usually involves subjective judgments concerning complex products or behaviors rubrics provide the criteria to guide these subjective judgments Rubrics Rubrics provide the criteria for assessing students' work. They can be used to assess virtually any product or behavior, such as essays, research reports, portfolios, works of art, recitals, oral presentations, performances, and group activities. Judgments can be self-assessments by students; or judgments can be made by others, such as faculty, other students, fieldwork supervisors, and external reviewers. Rubrics can be used to clarify expectations to students, to provide formative feedback to students, to grade students, and/or to assess courses and programs. There are two major types of rubrics: Holistic rubric — one global, holistic score for a product or behavior Analytic rubric — separate, holistic scoring of specified characteristics of a product or behavior Rubric Examples Campus Examples VALUE Rubrics (Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education; AAC&U)
- 2. 2 The rubric communicateswhat the outcome really means because it specifies the criteria for assessing its mastery. Criterion-Referenced Judgments Rubrics are criterion-referenced, rather than norm-referenced. Raters ask, “Did the student meet the criteria for level 4 of the rubric?” rather than “How well did this student do compared to other students?” This is more compatible with cooperative and collaborative learning environments than competitive grading schemes and is essential when using rubrics for program assessment because you want to learn how well students have met your standards. Creating a Rubric 1. Adapt an already-existing rubric. 2. Analytic Method Drafting a Rubric I generally find it easier to start at the extremes when drafting the criteria in the rubric's cells, then move up and down to draft the levels in the middle. Starting at the lowest and highest cells, you ask: What are the characteristics of an unacceptable product, the worst product you could imagine, a product that results when students are very weak on the outcome being assessed? What are the characteristics of a product that would be exemplary, that would exceed your expectations, that would result when the student is an expert on the outcome being assessed? Some words I find helpful: (in)complete, (in)accurate, (un)reasonable, detailed, thorough, creative, original, subtle, sophisticated, synthesizes, integrates, analyzes, minor/major conceptual errors, flexibility, adaptability, complexity of thought, clarity, well-documented, well-supported, professional, organized, insightful, relevant
- 3. 3 Rubric Criteria Say youare drafting a holistic rubric to assess students' command of basic grammar and punctuation. Look at these four examples. Which do you prefer? Why? Version 1 Does Not Meet Expectations Needs Improvement Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations 10 or more errors 5-12 errors 2-7 errors 0-1 error Version 2 Does Not Meet Expectations Needs Improvement Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations 10 or more errors 5-9 errors 2-4 errors 0-1 error Version 3 Does Not Meet Expectations Needs Improvement Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations lowest 10%; more errors than 90% of the other students bottom half; more errors than the average student, but not in the bottom 10% top half; fewer errors than the average student, but not in the top 10% top 10%; fewer errors than 90% of the students Version 4 Does Not Meet Expectations Needs Improvement Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations errors frequently interfere with reader's ability to understand meaning many errors or occasional errors that interfere with reader's ability to understand meaning contains a few errors, but they do not interfere with reader's ability to understand meaning virtually free of errors
- 4. 4 Example: Group CollaborationRubric Outcome: Students can collaborate effectively in groups. When the faculty discussed this outcome, they decided that students should be able to clearly communicate their ideas with others, show respect for others' ideas, and do their fair share of the work. Group Collaboration Rubric Dimension Rating Category 1 below expectations 2 needs improvement 3 meets expectations 4 exceeds expectations clearly communicate own ideas respect others' ideas do fair share of the work Rubrics across the Curriculum Learning outcomes specify what students can do to demonstrate their learning. Students master learning outcomes by practicing them repeatedly and receiving feedback to help them improve. What would happen if your students were given feedback on the same writing rubric for every paper they wrote in your curriculum or the same speaking rubric for every presentation they made in your curriculum?
- 5. 5 Adapting Assessment Rubricsfor Grading Here’s an assessment rubric—an analytic rubric with three dimensions for assessing oral presentation skills. Rubric for Assessing Oral Presentations Below Expectation Needs Improvement Satisfactory Exceeds Expectations Organization No apparent organization. Evidence is not used to support assertions. There is some organization, but the speaker occasionally goes off topic. Evidence used to support conclusions is weak. The presentation has a focus and provides some reasonable evidence to support conclusions. The presentation is carefully organized and provides convincing evidence to support conclusions. Content The content is inaccurate or overly general. Listeners are unlikely to learn anything or may be misled. The content is sometimes inaccurate or incomplete. Listeners may learn some isolated facts, but they are unlikely to gain new insights about the topic. The content is generally accurate and reasonably complete. Listeners may develop a few insights about the topic. The content is accurate and comprehensive. Listeners are likely to gain new insights about the topic. Delivery The speaker appears anxious and uncomfortable and reads notes, rather than speaks. Listeners are ignored. The speaker occasionally appears anxious or uncomfortable, and may occasionally read notes, rather than speak. Listeners are often ignored or misunderstood. The speaker is generally relaxed and comfortable. Listeners are generally recognized and understood. The speaker is professional, relaxed, and comfortable and interacts effectively with listeners.
- 6. 6 Alternative Format 1. Pointsare assigned and used for grading, as shown below, and the categories (Below Expectation, Needs Improvement, Satisfactory, Exemplary) can be used for assessment. Faculty might assign points in different ways, depending on the nature of their courses or decide to add more rows for course-specific criteria or comments. Notice how this rubric allows faculty, who may not be experts on oral presentation skills, to give detailed formative feedback to students. This feedback describes present skills and indicates what students should do to improve. Effective rubrics can help faculty reduce the time they spend grading and eliminate the need to repeatedly write the same comments to multiple students. Rubric for Grading Oral Presentations Below Expectation Needs Improvement Satisfactory Exceeds Expectations Score Organization No apparent organization. Evidence is not used to support assertions. (0-6) There is some organization, but the speaker occasionally goes off topic. Evidence used to support conclusions is weak. (7-9) The presentation has a focus and provides some reasonable evidence to support conclusions. (10-12) The presentation is carefully organized and provides convincing evidence to support conclusions. (13-15) Content The content is inaccurate or overly general. Listeners are unlikely to learn anything or may be misled. (0-4) The content is sometimes inaccurate or incomplete. Listeners may learn some isolated facts, but they are unlikely to gain new insights about the topic. (5-6) The content is generally accurate and reasonably complete. Listeners may develop a few insights about the topic. (7-8) The content is accurate and comprehensive. Listeners are likely to gain new insights about the topic. (9-10) Delivery The speaker appears anxious and uncomfortable and reads notes, rather than speaks. Listeners are ignored. (0-11) The speaker occasionally appears anxious or uncomfortable, and may occasionally read notes, rather than speak. Listeners are often ignored or misunderstood. (12-17) The speaker is generally relaxed and comfortable. Listeners are generally recognized and understood. (18-21) The speaker is professional, relaxed, and comfortable and interacts effectively with listeners. (22-25) Total Score
- 7. 7 Alternative Format 2. Weightsare used for grading; categories (Below Expectation, Needs Improvement, Satisfactory, Exemplary) can be used for assessment. Individual faculty determine how to assign weights for their course grading. Faculty may circle or underline material in the cells to emphasize criteria that were particularly important during the assessment/grading, and they may add a section for comments or other grading criteria. Rubric for Grading Oral Presentations Below Expectation Needs Improvement Satisfactory Exceeds Expectations Weight Organization No apparent organization. Evidence is not used to support assertions. There is some organization, but the speaker occasionally goes off topic. Evidence used to support conclusions is weak. The presentation has a focus and provides some reasonable evidence to support conclusions. The presentation is carefully organized and provides convincing evidence to support conclusions. 30% Content The content is inaccurate or overly general. Listeners are unlikely to learn anything or may be misled. The content is sometimes inaccurate or incomplete. Listeners may learn some isolated facts, but they are unlikely to gain new insights about the topic. The content is generally accurate and reasonably complete. Listeners may develop a few insights about the topic. The content is accurate and comprehensive. Listeners are likely to gain new insights about the topic. 20% Delivery The speaker appears anxious and uncomfortable and reads notes, rather than speaks. Listeners are ignored. The speaker occasionally appears anxious or uncomfortable, and may occasionally read notes, rather than speak. Listeners are often ignored or misunderstood. The speaker is generally relaxed and comfortable. Listeners are generally recognized and understood. The speaker is professional, relaxed, and comfortable and interacts effectively with listeners. 50% Comments
- 8. 8 Alternative Format 3. Somefaculty prefer to grade holistically, rather than through assigning numbers. In this example, the faculty member checks off characteristics of the speech and determines the grade based on a holistic judgment. The categories (Below Expectation, Needs Improvement, Satisfactory, Exemplary) can be used for assessment. Rubric for Assessing Oral Presentations Below Expectation Needs Improvement Satisfactory Exceeds Expectations Organization o No apparent organization. o Evidence is not used to support assertions. o There is some organization, but the speaker occasionally goes off topic. o Evidence used to support conclusions is weak. o The presentation has a focus. o Student provides some reasonable evidence to support conclusions. o The presentation is carefully organized. o Speaker provides convincing evidence to support conclusions. Content o The content is inaccurate or overly general. o Listeners are unlikely to learn anything or may be misled. o The content is sometimes inaccurate or incomplete. o Listeners may learn some isolated facts, but they are unlikely to gain new insights about the topic. o The content is generally accurate and reasonably complete. o Listeners may develop a few insights about the topic. o The content is accurate and comprehensive o Listeners are likely to gain new insights about the topic. Delivery o The speaker appears anxious and uncomfortable and reads notes, rather than speaks. o Listeners are ignored. o The speaker occasionally appears anxious or uncomfortable, and may occasionally read notes, rather than speak. o Listeners are often ignored or misunderstood. o The speaker is generally relaxed and comfortable. o Listeners are generally recognized and understood. o The speaker is professional, relaxed, and comfortable. o The speaker interacts effectively with listeners. Comments
- 9. 9 Alternative Format 4. Combinationsof Various Ideas. As long as the twelve assessment cells are used in the same way by all faculty, grading and assessment can be done simultaneously. Additional criteria for grading can be added, as shown below. Rubric for Assessing Oral Presentations Below Expectation Needs Improvement Satisfactory Exceeds Expectations Weight Organization o No apparent organization. o Evidence is not used to support assertions. o There is some organization, but the speaker occasionally goes off topic. o Evidence used to support conclusions is weak. o The presentation has a focus. o Student provides some reasonable evidence to support conclusions. o The presentation is carefully organized. o Speaker provides convincing evidence to support conclusions. 30% Content o The content is inaccurate or overly general. o Listeners are unlikely to learn anything or may be misled. o The content is sometimes inaccurate or incomplete. o Listeners may learn some isolated facts, but they are unlikely to gain new insights about the topic. o The content is generally accurate and reasonably complete. o Listeners may develop a few insights about the topic. o The content is accurate and comprehensive o Listeners are likely to gain new insights about the topic. 20% Delivery o The speaker appears anxious and uncomfortable and reads notes, rather than speaks. o Listeners are ignored. o The speaker occasionally appears anxious or uncomfortable, and may occasionally read notes, rather than speak. o Listeners are often ignored or misunderstood. o The speaker is generally relaxed and comfortable. o Listeners are generally recognized and understood. o The speaker is professional, relaxed, and comfortable. o The speaker interacts effectively with listeners. 40% References o Speaker fails to integrate relevant journal articles into the speech. o Speaker integrates 1 or 2 relevant journal articles into the speech. o Speaker integrates 3 or 4 journal relevant articles into the speech. o Speaker integrates 5 or more relevant journal articles into the speech. 10%
- 10. 10 Grading Using Oneof the Above Rubrics 1. Every student receives explicit feedback on at least three major dimensions of speaking. They learn what they are doing well and what they need to improve. 2. Faculty can grade students rapidly as students give their presentations. 3. Students can give quick feedback to their peers who give presentations. 4. If students give subsequent presentations, they (and you) can track improvements. 5. Combining student data on each dimension allows you to identify which aspects of the outcome students are achieving and which they are not achieving at the level you expect. This allows you to decide where to put more focus when you address this outcome again. Rubrics Can: Speed up grading Clarify expectations to students; students learn more when your expectations are clear to them Reduce student grade complaints Help faculty create better assignments that ensure that students display what you want them to demonstrate Help faculty tailor instruction to meet students' identified needs Suggestions for Using Rubrics in Courses 1. Grade using a rubric. Hand out the grading rubric with the assignment so students will know your expectations and how they'll be graded. Spend time with your students discussing the rubric before they do their work. 2. Integrate rubrics into lectures and course activities, such as reviewing the Civic Engagement VALUE rubric when discussing community service learning or internship requirements. 3. Develop a rubric with your students for an assignment, such as a group project. Students can then monitor themselves and their peers using agreed-upon criteria that they helped develop. Many faculty find that students create higher standards for themselves than faculty would impose on them. 4. Have students apply your rubric to some sample products before they create their own. Faculty report that students are quite accurate when doing this, and this process should help them evaluate their own products as they are being developed. The ability to evaluate, edit, and improve draft documents is an important skill. 5. Have students exchange paper drafts and give peer feedback using the rubric, then give students a few days before the final drafts are turned in to you. You might also require that they turn in the draft and scored rubric with their final paper. 6. Have students self-assess their products using the grading rubric and hand in the self- assessment with the product; then faculty and students can compare self- and faculty- generated evaluations.
- 11. 11 Ideas to Consider 1.Collaborate with colleagues to develop rubrics for your program learning outcomes. Use program assessment to improve students' learning opportunities. 2. Work with colleagues to integrate assessment rubrics across your curriculum. 3. Adapt assessment rubrics for grading in your courses. This aligns your courses with expectations for students who complete your program and allows you to identify areas that need further attention in your courses. 4. Integrate rubrics into courses: a. share grading rubrics with students before they do their work b. integrate rubrics into lectures or activities c. develop rubrics with your students d. have students apply rubrics to sample products e. have students provide peer feedback using rubrics f. have students self-assess using rubrics Wrap-Up 1. What did you learn from this session? 2. What successes have you had with rubrics? 3. What problems have you faced with rubrics? How did you resolve the problems? 4. What questions remain?
- 12. 12 Appendix of RubricExamples* Writing Rubric (Johnson Community College) 13 Writing Rubric (Roanoke College) 14 Writing Rubric (Northeastern Illinois University) 15 Scoring Guide for Integrative Science (Fresno State University) 16 Research Project Rubric 17 Levels of Investigation (Bowling Green University) 18 Levels of Presentation (Bowling Green University) 19 Holistic Critical Thinking Rubric (Portland State University) 20 Critical Thinking Rubric (Northeastern Illinois University) 22 Information Competence (CA State University) 23 Collaboration Rubric (San Diego State University) 24 Dance Rubric (University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee) 25 VALUE Rubrics 27 *Rubrics were taken verbatim from websites and were sometimes lightly reformatted to fit the printed page.
- 13. 13 Writing Rubric Johnson CommunityCollege, downloaded 12/22/04 from http://www.jccc.net/home/depts/6111/site/assmnt/cogout/comwrite 6 = Essay demonstrates excellent composition skills including a clear and thought-provoking thesis, appropriate and effective organization, lively and convincing supporting materials, effective diction and sentence skills, and perfect or near perfect mechanics including spelling and punctuation. The writing perfectly accomplishes the objectives of the assignment. 5 = Essay contains strong composition skills including a clear and thought-provoking thesis, although development, diction, and sentence style may suffer minor flaws. Shows careful and acceptable use of mechanics. The writing effectively accomplishes the goals of the assignment. 4 = Essay contains above average composition skills, including a clear, insightful thesis, although development may be insufficient in one area and diction and style may not be consistently clear and effective. Shows competence in the use of mechanics. Accomplishes the goals of the assignment with an overall effective approach. 3 = Essay demonstrates competent composition skills including adequate development and organization, although the development of ideas may be trite, assumptions may be unsupported in more than one area, the thesis may not be original, and the diction and syntax may not be clear and effective. Minimally accomplishes the goals of the assignment. 2 = Composition skills may be flawed in either the clarity of the thesis, the development, or organization. Diction, syntax, and mechanics may seriously affect clarity. Minimally accomplishes the majority of the goals of the assignment. 1 = Composition skills may be flawed in two or more areas. Diction, syntax, and mechanics are excessively flawed. Fails to accomplish the goals of the assignment. Revised October 2003
- 14. 14 Writing Rubric (FIPSEProject) Retrieved August 28, 2008 from http://web.roanoke.edu/Documents/Writing%20Rubrics.July%2007.doc Below Basic Basic Proficient Advanced Ideas Shows minimal engagement with the topic, failing to recognize multiple dimensions/ perspectives; lacking even basic observations Shows some engagement with the topic without elaboration; offers basic observations but rarely original insight Demonstrates engagement with the topic, recognizing multiple dimensions and/or perspectives; offers some insight Demonstrates engagement with the topic, recognizing multiple dimensions and/or perspectives with elaboration and depth; offers considerable insight Focus and Thesis Paper lacks focus and/or a discernible thesis. Some intelligible ideas, but thesis is weak, unclear, or too broad. Identifiable thesis representing adequate understanding of the assigned topic; minimal irrelevant material Clear, narrow thesis representing full understanding of the assignment; every word counts Evidence Little to no evidence Some evidence but not enough to develop argument in unified way. Evidence may be inaccurate, irrelevant, or inappropriate for the purpose of the essay Evidence accurate, well documented, and relevant, but not complete, well integrated, and/or appropriate for the purpose of the essay Evidence is relevant, accurate, complete, well integrated, well documented, and appropriate for the purpose of the essay. Organization Organization is missing both overall and within paragraphs. Introduction and conclusion may be lacking or illogical. Organization, overall and/or within paragraphs, is formulaic or occasionally lacking in coherence; few evident transitions. Introduction and conclusion may lack logic. Few organizational problems on any of the 3 levels (overall, paragraph, transitions). Introduction and conclusion are effectively related to the whole. Organization is logical and appropriate to assignment; paragraphs are well-developed and appropriately divided; ideas linked with smooth and effective transitions. Introduction and conclusion are effectively related to the whole. Style and Mechanics Multiple and serious errors of sentence structure; frequent errors in spelling and capitalization; intrusive and/or inaccurate punctuation such that communication is hindered. Proofreading not evident. Sentences show errors of structure and little or no variety; many errors of punctuation, spelling and/or capitalization. Errors interfere with meaning in places. Careful proofreading not evident. Effective and varied sentences; some errors in sentence construction; only occasional punctuation, spelling and/or capitalization errors. Each sentence structured effectively, powerfully; rich, well-chosen variety of sentence styles and length; virtually free of punctuation, spelling, capitalization errors.
- 15. 15 Writing Rubric Northeastern IllinoisUniversity (adapted from: Barbara Walvoord, Winthrop Univ., Virginia Community College System, Univ. of Washington) Quality Criteria No/Limited Proficiency Some Proficiency Proficiency High Proficiency (Rating) 1. Thesis/Focus: (a) Originality Thesis is missing Thesis may be obvious or unimaginative Thesis is somewhat original Develops fresh insight that challenges the reader’s thinking; 2. Thesis/Focus: (b) Clarity Reader cannot determine thesis & purpose OR thesis has no relation to the writing task Thesis and purpose are somewhat vague OR only loosely related to the writing task Thesis and purpose are fairly clear and match the writing task Thesis and purpose are clear to the reader; closely match the writing task 3. Organization Unclear organization OR organizational plan is inappropriate to thesis. No transitions Some signs of logical organization. May have abrupt or illogical shifts & ineffective flow of ideas Organization supports thesis and purpose. Transitions are mostly appropriate. Sequence of ideas could be improved Fully & imaginatively supports thesis & purpose. Sequence of ideas is effective. Transitions are effective 4. Support/ Reasoning (a) Ideas (b) Details Offers simplistic, undeveloped, or cryptic support for the ideas. Inappropriate or off-topic generalizations, faulty assumptions, errors of fact Offers somewhat obvious support that may be too broad. Details are too general, not interpreted, irrelevant to thesis, or inappropriately repetitive Offers solid but less original reasoning. Assumptions are not always recognized or made explicit. Contains some appropriate details or examples Substantial, logical, & concrete development of ideas. Assumptions are made explicit. Details are germane, original, and convincingly interpreted 5. Use of sources/ Documentation Neglects important sources. Overuse of quotations or paraphrase to substitute writer’s own ideas. (Possibly uses source material without acknowledgement.) Uses relevant sources but lacks in variety of sources and/or the skillful combination of sources. Quotations & paraphrases may be too long and/or inconsistently referenced Uses sources to support, extend, and inform, but not substitute writer’s own development of idea. Doesn’t overuse quotes, but may not always conform to required style manual Uses sources to support, extend, and inform, but not substitute writer’s own development of idea. Combines material from a variety of sources, incl. pers. observation, scientific data, authoritative testimony. Doesn’t overuse quotes. http://www.neiu.edu/~neassess/gened.htm#rubric
- 16. 16 General Education ScoringGuide for Integrative Science Scoring Level Science and Society Basic Concepts and Fundamental Principles Scientific Approach Nature of Science 4 - Accomplished Develops and defends an informed position, integrating values, science, and technology. Integrates and applies basic scientific concepts and principles. Demonstrates comprehension of the scientific approach; illustrates with examples Demonstrates scientific reasoning across multiple disciplines. 3 - Competent Correctly describes perspectives concerning the scientific aspects of a societal issue. Shows clear comprehension of basic scientific concepts and principles. Accurately expresses concepts relating to the scientific approach Interprets and relates scientific results in a way that shows a clear recognition of the nature of science. 2 - Developing Recognizes the place of science in human affairs, but is unable to communicate its roles. Able to state basic scientific concepts and principles. Uses vocabulary related to scientific methods in a rote manner or showing simple conceptualization Provides simplistic or incomplete explanations of the nature of science. 1 - Beginning Does not visualize a role or need for science in human affairs. Lacks understanding of basic scientific concepts and principles. Shows minimal understanding of scientific methods Does not distinguish between scientific, political, religious, or ethical statements. http://www.csufresno.edu/cetl/assessment/ (click on IBScoring.doc)
- 17. 17 Research Process Rubric* BeginningNovice Proficient Distinguished Defining the Topic Student has no research question. Teacher has to supply question. Basic, essential question is vague. Related questions do not help answer basic question. Student knows general subject matter to be searched. Essential question is focused and clear. Student knows some related concepts for his topic. Most related questions focus topic. Essential question is clear, complete, and requires critical thinking skills. Related questions focus topic accurately. Collecting Information Student looses focus. Information is not accurate or complete. Student uses the minimal number of sources. Information, though interesting, frequently does not relate to questions. Student efficiently determines the appropriate sources for information and uses multiple, varied sources. Most information relates directly to the questions. Student utilizes a variety of resources and only the information that answers the essential question is used. Search strategies are revised as information is located or could not be found. Evaluating Sources Only one type of source is used. Little effort is made to determine validity of source. Two or more types of sources are used. Student recognizes who is authoring the information. Multiple types of sources are used and reflect support of the essential and related questions. The scope, authority and currency of the information are taken into account. Diverse sources are used and reflect support of the essential questions. Student compares information from at least 2 sources for accuracy, validity, and inherent bias. Extracting Information Product contains missing details and isn’t completely accurate. Questions are unanswered. Product is not complete. Only one related question is answered. Student can summarize information source but misses some concepts. Product answers the questions in a way that reflects learning using some detail and accuracy. Student identifies key concepts from the information source by scanning and skimming. Student assesses information in a meaningful way and creates a product that clearly answers the questions with accuracy, detail and understanding. Student determines if information supports or rejects student’s thesis. Citing Information Sources are not cited properly. MLA format is followed although several errors are apparent. MLA format is followed. Student lists most of the components in correct form. MLA format is exact. No errors are evident. Reflecting on Research Student is disorganized, does not have a research strategy and does not use time effectively. Student needs considerable teacher help to organize research. Some steps are missing in the plan. Student works within the time frame and develops a system to organize information. Requires some teacher help. Time management skills are excellent. Student develops a clear method to organize information and makes revisions in plan when needed. *Retrieved December 30, 2006 from http://www.csd99.k12.il.us/NORTH/library/PDF/researchRubric.pdf
- 18. 18 Levels of Investigation Bowling Green University, http://folios.bgsu.edu/assessment/Rubrics.htm, downloaded March 21, 2002 “Investigate” calls attentionto systematic processes of exploring issues, collecting and analyzing evidence, and making informed judgments. Investigation quality for course assignments will be evaluated using the features defining the four levels shown below. Level 1 Investigation (Beginner) Questions and goal(s) of investigation not stated clearly or appropriately (e.g., may be too broad, superficial, specific, and/or at a structural level) Few, inappropriate, or irrelevant sources reviewed for background information Review of background information does not aid in answering question(s) and goal(s) of current project Method of investigation not discussed or described poorly Strategy for analysis not outlined or outlined poorly Does not distinguish facts from opinions Offers basic description of background research, but no evaluation, conclusion, or extension of this research Level 2 Investigation (Novice) Questions and goal(s) of investigation stated with sufficient, general focus Multiple sources (mostly relevant) used for background information Surface level of evaluation is offered, with only confirmatory (and no disconfirmatory) evidence to support ideas Method of investigation is described, but is flawed or unrealistic Strategy for analysis is discussed, but incomplete Facts are separated from opinions Reasonable but limited inferences and conclusions drawn from background information Level 3 Investigation (Proficient) Questions and goal(s) of project stated explicitly, with appropriate focus Multiple relevant sources searched for background information Sufficient number of sources to provide a representative depiction of relevant background information Review of background information considers both confirming and disconfirming evidence Method of investigation sufficient to answer all research questions Analysis strategy is direct, competent, and appropriate Conclusions are based on the results of the analysis, as a logical extension of the findings, or demonstrating an understanding of theory as well as how to apply it to current project Level 4 Investigation (Advanced) All of the positive features of proficient investigation, plus: Questions and goal(s) of investigation are original, reflecting an in-depth knowledge of content area, and consider an issue(s) that previous investigations did not address Review of background information considers both confirmatory and disconfirmatory evidence of ideas, and refutes competing explanations of findings Possible multiple methods of investigation sufficient to answer all research questions and reflects a sophisticated understanding of investigative processes Analysis strategy has depth and may consider material from content areas outside of main focus of questions and goal(s) of project Convincing conclusions are drawn from current investigation and generalizations to related areas are proposed (demonstrates an understanding of theory as well as how to apply it beyond the current project
- 19. 19 Levels of Presentation BowlingGreen University, http://www.bgsu.edu/offices/provost/Assessment/Present.htm “Presenting” requires fluency not only in English or another language, but often also in other symbol systems, such as logical, mathematical, visual, spatial, musical, electronic, or gestures and movements. Speaking quality for course presentations will be evaluated using the features defining the four levels shown below. Level 1 Presenting (Beginner) Unfocused sense of audience Inadequate organization and/or development Inappropriate or insufficient details to support ideas Does not demonstrate understanding of topic beyond a surface level Looks only at notes or away from audience Vocal qualities (pace, inflection, volume, enunciation) distract from the content Lacks interest in the topic Level 2 Presenting (Novice) Vague purpose or multiple purposes Sense of audience wavers Evident but inconsistent development Does not advance an argument with adequate support Demonstrates some understanding of the topic, but does make connections among ideas Little eye contact is made with audience Vocal qualities (pace, inflection, volume, enunciation) interfere with the content Shows some interest for the topic Level 3 Presenting (Proficient) Expresses a clear, coherent thesis Sticks to the purpose and provides adequate transitions among ideas Moves beyond surface understanding and demonstrates facility with topical and disciplinary knowledge and vocabulary Advances argument with sound evidence and references Appropriate eye contact is made with audience Vocal qualities (pace, inflection, volume, enunciation) support the content Shows enthusiasm for topic Level 4 Presenting (Advanced) Insightful, creative or skillfully presented purpose Awareness of audience demonstrated through form, language, and presence Effective organization contributes to full development of presentation Innovatively or expertly advances the presentation with well-researched evidence and documentation Eye contact is used to gauge reactions and understanding Vocal qualities (pace, inflection, volume, enunciation) reinforce and animate the content Creates enthusiasm about topic in others
- 20. 20 Portland State UniversityStudies Program Holistic Critical Thinking Rubric* Inquiry and Critical Thinking Rubric Students will learn various modes of inquiry through interdisciplinary curricula—problem posing, investigating, conceptualizing—in order to become active, self-motivated, and empowered learners. 6 (Highest)—Consistently does all or almost all of the following: Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc. Identifies the salient arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con. Thoughtfully analyzes and evaluates major alternative points of view. Generates alternative explanations of phenomena or event. Justifies key results and procedures, explains assumptions and reasons. Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead. Makes ethical judgments. 5—Does most the following: Accurately interprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc. Thinks through issues by identifying relevant arguments (reasons and claims) pro and con. Offers analysis and evaluation of obvious alternative points of view. Generates alternative explanations of phenomena or event. Justifies (by using) some results or procedures, explains reasons. Fair-mindedly follows where evidence and reasons lead. 4—Does most the following: Describes events, people, and places with some supporting details from the source. Make connections to sources, either personal or analytic. Demonstrates a basic ability to analyze, interpret, and formulate inferences. States or briefly includes more than one perspective in discussing literature, experiences, and points of view of others. Takes some risks by occasionally questioning sources or by stating interpretations and predictions. Demonstrates little evidence of rethinking or refinement of one’s own perspective. 3—Does most or many of the following: Respond by retelling or graphically showing events or facts. Makes personal connections or identifies connections within or between sources in a limited way. Is beginning to use appropriate evidence to back ideas. Discusses literature, experiences, and points of view of others in terms of own experience. Responds to sources at factual or literal level. Includes little or no evidence of refinement of initial response or shift in dualistic thinking. Demonstrates difficulty with organization and thinking is uneven. 2—Does many or most the following: Misinterprets evidence, statements, graphics, questions, etc.
- 21. 21 Fails toidentify strong, relevant counter arguments. Draws unwarranted or fallacious conclusions. Justifies few results or procedures, seldom explains reasons. Regardless of the evidence or reasons, maintains or defends views based on self-interest or preconceptions. 1 (lowest)—Consistently does all or almost all of the following: Offers biased interpretations of evidence, statements, graphics, questions, information, or the points of view of others. Fails to identify or hastily dismisses strong, relevant counterarguments. Ignores or superficially evaluates obvious alternative points of view. Argues using fallacious or irrelevant reasons and unwarranted claims. Does not justify results or procedures, nor explain reasons. Exhibits close-mindedness or hostility to reason. X—No basis for scoring. (Use only for missing or malfunctioning portfolios.) *taken verbatim from Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. J. (2005). Introduction to Rubrics. Sterling, VA: Stylus, pp. 122-123
- 22. 22 Northeastern Illinois UniversityGeneral Education Critical Thinking Rubric Downloaded 3/2/05 from http://www.neiu.edu/~neassess/gened.htm#rubric Quality Macro Criteria No/Limited Proficiency (D&E) Some Proficiency (C) Proficiency (B) High Proficiency (A) 1. Identifies & Explains Issues Fails to identify, summarize, or explain the main problem or question. Represents the issues inaccurately or inappropriately. Identifies main issues but does not summarize or explain them clearly or sufficiently Successfully identifies and summarizes the main issues, but does not explain why/how they are problems or create questions Clearly identifies and summarizes main issues and successfully explains why/how they are problems or questions; and identifies embedded or implicit issues, addressing their relationships to each other. 2. Distinguishes Types of Claims Fails to label correctly any of the factual, conceptual and value dimensions of the problems and proposed solutions. Successfully identifies some, but not all of the factual, conceptual, and value aspects of the questions and answers. Successfully separates and labels all the factual, conceptual, and value claims Clearly and accurately labels not only all the factual, conceptual, and value, but also those implicit in the assumptions and the implications of positions and arguments. 3. Recognizes Stakeholders and Contexts Fails accurately to identify and explain any empirical or theoretical contexts for the issues. Presents problems as having no connections to other conditions or contexts. Shows some general understanding of the influences of empirical and theoretical contexts on stakeholders, but does not identify many specific ones relevant to situation at hand. Correctly identifies all the empirical and most of theoretical contexts relevant to all the main stakeholders in the situation. Not only correctly identifies all the empirical and theoretical contexts relevant to all the main stakeholders, but also finds minor stakeholders and contexts and shows the tension or conflicts of interests among them. 4. Considers Methodology Fails to explain how/why/which specific methods of research are relevant to the kind of issue at hand. Identifies some but not all methods required for dealing with the issue; does not explain why they are relevant or effective. Successfully explains how/why/which methods are most relevant to the problem. In addition to explaining how/why/which methods are typically used, also describes embedded methods and possible alternative methods of working on the problem. 5. Frames Personal Responses and Acknowledges Other Perspectives Fails to formulate and clearly express own point of view, (or) fails to anticipate objections to his/her point of view, (or) fails to consider other perspectives and position. Formulates a vague and indecisive point of view, or anticipates minor but not major objections to his/her point of view, or considers weak but not strong alternative positions. Formulates a clear and precise personal point of view concerning the issue, and seriously discusses its weaknesses as well as its strengths. Not only formulates a clear and precise personal point of view, but also acknowledges objections and rival positions and provides convincing replies to these.
- 23. 23 Rubric for AssessingInformation Competence in the California State University ACRL Standard Beginning Proficient Advanced 1. Determine the Extent of the Information Needed Student is unable to effectively formulate a research question based on an information need. Student can formulate a question that is focused and clear. Student identifies concepts related to the topic, and can find a sufficient number of information resources to meet the information need. Question is focused, clear, and complete. Key concepts and terms are identified. Extensive information sources are identified in numerous potential formats. 2. Access the Needed Information Effectively and Efficiently Student is unfocused and unclear about search strategy. Time is not used effectively and efficiently. Information gathered lacks relevance, quality, and balance. Student executes an appropriate search strategy within a reasonable amount of time. Student can solve problems by finding a variety of relevant information resources, and can evaluate search effectiveness. Student is aware and able to analyze search results, and evaluate the appropriateness of the variety of (or) multiple relevant sources of information that directly fulfill an information need for the particular discipline, 3. Evaluate Information and its Sources Critically Student is unaware of criteria that might be used to judge information quality. Little effort is made to examine the information located Student examines information using criteria such as authority, credibility, relevance, timeliness, and accuracy, and is able to make judgments about what to keep and what to discard. Multiple and diverse sources and viewpoints of information are compared and evaluated according to specific criteria appropriate for the discipline. Student is able to match criteria to a specific information need, and can articulate how identified sources relate to the context of the discipline. 4. Use Information Effectively to Accomplish a Specific Purpose Student is not aware of the information necessary to research a topic, and the types of data that would be useful in formulating a convincing argument. Information is incomplete and does not support the intended purpose. Student uses appropriate information to solve a problem, answer a question, write a paper, or other purposes Student is aware of the breadth and depth of research on a topic, and is able to reflect on search strategy, synthesize and integrate information from a variety of sources, draw appropriate conclusions, and is able to clearly communicate ideas to others 5. Understand the Economic, Legal, and Social Issues surrounding the Use of Information, and Access and Use Information Ethically and Legally Student is unclear regarding proper citation format, and/or copies and paraphrases the information and ideas of others without giving credit to authors. Student does not know how to distinguish between information that is objective and biased, and does not know the role that free access to information plays in a democratic society. Student gives credit for works used by quoting and listing references. Student is an ethical consumer and producer of information, and understands how free access to information, and free expression, contribute to a democratic society. Student understands and recognizes the concept of intellectual property, can defend him/herself if challenged, and can properly incorporate the ideas/published works of others into their own work building upon them. Student can articulate the value of information to a free and democratic society, and can use specific criteria to discern objectivity/fact from bias/propaganda. *Prepared by the CSU Information Competence Initiative, October 2002, based on the 2000 ACRL Information Literacy Competency Standards For Higher Education. For more information, see http://www.calstate.edu/LS/1_rubric.doc.
- 24. 24 San Diego StateUniversity Cabrillo Tidepool Study Collaboration Rubric Retrieved January 3, 2007 from http://edweb.sdsu.edu/triton/tidepoolunit/Rubrics/collrubric.html Beginning 1 Developing 2 Accomplished 3 Exemplary 4 Score Contribute Research & Gather Information Does not collect any information that relates to the topic. Collects very little information-- some relates to the topic. Collects some basic information--most relates to the topic. Collects a great deal of information--all relates to the topic. Share Information Does not relay any information to teammates. Relays very little information-- some relates to the topic. Relays some basic information--most relates to the topic. Relays a great deal of information--all relates to the topic. Be Punctual Does not hand in any assignments. Hands in most assignments late. Hands in most assignments on time. Hands in all assignments on time. Take Responsibility Fulfill Team Role's Duties Does not perform any duties of assigned team role. Performs very little duties. Performs nearly all duties. Performs all duties of assigned team role. Participate in Science Conference Does not speak during the science conference. Either gives too little information or information which is irrelevant to topic. Offers some information-- most is relevant. Offers a fair amount of important information--all is relevant. Share Equally Always relies on others to do the work. Rarely does the assigned work-- often needs reminding. Usually does the assigned work--rarely needs reminding. Always does the assigned work without having to be reminded. Value Others' Viewpoints Listen to Other Teammates Is always talking--never allows anyone else to speak. Usually doing most of the talking--rarely allows others to speak. Listens, but sometimes talks too much. Listens and speaks a fair amount. Cooperate with Teammates Usually argues with teammates. Sometimes argues. Rarely argues. Never argues with teammates. Make Fair Decisions Usually wants to have things their way. Often sides with friends instead of considering all views. Usually considers all views. Always helps team to reach a fair decision. Total
- 25. 25 GENERIC DANCE RUBRIC ASSESSING SKILL DEVELOPMENT* Use of Performance Skills Novice When performing basiclocomotor and axial movement dancers show: undefined placement within spatial design limited response to rhythmic structure & tempo changes minimal range of dynamics and movement qualities sporadic concentration Apprentice When performing basic locomotor and axial movement dancers show: clear response to rhythmic structure & tempo changes moderate range of dynamics and movement qualities concentration & focus Proficient When performing moderately challenging movement, dancers show: Same as Apprentice Advanced When performing moderately challenging movement, dancers show: complexity and variety of spatial elements clear response to a variety of rhythmic structures & tempo changes broad range of dynamics and movement projected concentration & focus Distinguished When performing technically challenging movement, dancers amplify the composition by showing: projected artistic expression clarity of purpose sensitive stylistic nuance and phrasing Use of Compositional Elements Novice In choreographing phrases, dancers show: minimal demonstration of the principles of space, time, and energy limited body movement Apprentice In choreographing phrases or pieces, dancers show: changes in use of space, time, and energy basic form of beg, mid, end Proficient In choreographing pieces, dancers show: purposeful approach to space, time, and energy forms such as ABA, rondo, canon, theme and variation personal expression & full body involvement Advanced In choreographing pieces, dancers show: complexity and variety of spatial elements forms integral to the expression of the piece
- 26. 26 full bodymovement that clearly expresses the choreographic intent Distinguished In choreographing pieces, dancers demonstrate sophisticated compositional awareness by showing: aesthetically effective use of space, time, energy, and form facility in use of abstract as well as literal expressions of a theme powerful, clear personal expression *Rubric shared by Connie M. Schroeder, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee on the POD listserv, April 14, 2008.
- 27. 27 AAC&U VALUE Rubrics Theserubrics were developed for the Essential Learning Outcomes as part of the VALUE initiative (Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education) of the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). More information can be found at http://www.aacu.org/value/rubrics The Essential Learning Outcomes Beginning in school, and continuing at successively higher levels across their college studies, students should prepare for twenty-first-century challenges by gaining: Knowledge of Human Cultures and the Physical and Natural World Through study in the sciences and mathematics, social sciences, humanities, histories, languages, and the arts Focused by engagement with big questions, both contemporary and enduring Intellectual and Practical Skills, including Inquiry and analysis Critical and creative thinking Written and oral communication Quantitative literacy Information literacy Teamwork and problem solving Practiced extensively, across the curriculum, in the context of progressively more challenging problems, projects, and standards for performance Personal and Social Responsibility, including Civic knowledge and engagement—local and global Intercultural knowledge and competence Ethical reasoning and action Foundations and skills for lifelong learning Anchored through active involvement with diverse communities and real-world challenges Integrative Learning, including Synthesis and advanced accomplishment across general and specialized studies Demonstrated through the application of knowledge, skills, and responsibilities to new settings and complex problems Note: This list was developed through a multiyear dialogue with hundreds of colleges and universities about needed goals for student learning; analysis of a long series of recommendations and reports from the business community; and analysis of the accreditation requirements for engineering, business, nursing, and teacher
- 28. 28 education. The findingsare documented in a series of AAC&U publications, including Greater Expectations: A New Vision for Learning as a Nation Goes to College (2002), Taking Responsibility for the Quality of the Baccalaureate Degree (2004), Liberal Education Outcomes: A Preliminary Report on Achievement in College (2005), and College Learning for the new Global Century (2007). Included in this packet are the following rubrics: Civic Engagement page 29 Creative Thinking page 33 Critical Thinking page 36 Ethical Reasoning page 39 Information Literacy page 42 Inquiry and Analysis page 44 Integrative Learning page 48 Intercultural Knowledge and Competence page 51 Oral Communication page 55 Problem Solving page 59 Teamwork page 62 Quantitative Literacy page 65 Written Communication page 69 Reading page 72 Lifelong Learning page 76 Global Learning page 79 The Introduction to each VALUE rubric begins with this statement: The VALUE rubrics were developed by teams of faculty experts representing colleges and universities across the United States through a process that examined many existing campus rubrics and related documents for each learning outcome and incorporated additional feedback from faculty. The rubrics articulate fundamental criteria for each learning outcome, with performance descriptors demonstrating progressively more sophisticated levels of attainment. The rubrics are intended for institutional-level use in evaluating and discussing student learning, not for grading. The core expectations articulated in all 15 of the VALUE rubrics can and should be translated into the language of individual campuses, disciplines, and even courses. The utility of the VALUE rubrics is to position learning at all undergraduate levels within a basic framework of expectations such that evidence of learning can by shared nationally through a common dialog and understanding of student success.
- 29. 29 CIVIC ENGAGEMENT VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Civic engagement is "working to make a difference in the civic life of our communities and developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values and motivation to make that difference. It means promoting the quality of life in a community, through both political and non-political processes." (Excerpted from Civic Responsibility and Higher Education, edited by Thomas Ehrlich, published by Oryx Press, 2000, Preface, page vi.) In addition, civic engagement encompasses actions wherein individuals participate in activities of personal and public concern that are both individually life enriching and socially beneficial to the community. Framing Language Preparing graduates for their public lives as citizens, members of communities, and professionals in society has historically been a responsibility of higher education. Yet the outcome of a civic-minded graduate is a complex concept. Civic learning outcomes are framed by personal identity and commitments, disciplinary frameworks and traditions, pre-professional norms and practice, and the mission and values of colleges and universities. This rubric is designed to make the civic learning outcomes more explicit. Civic engagement can take many forms, from individual volunteerism to organizational involvement to electoral participation. For students this could include community-based learning through service-learning classes, community-based research, or service within the community. Multiple types of work samples or collections of work may be utilized to assess this, such as: • The student creates and manages a service program that engages others (such as youth or members of a neighborhood) in learning about and taking action on an issue they care about. In the process, the student also teaches and models processes that engage others in deliberative democracy, in having a voice, participating in democratic processes, and taking specific actions to affect an issue. • The student researches, organizes, and carries out a deliberative democracy forum on a particular issue, one that includes multiple perspectives on that issue and how best to make positive change through various courses of public action. As a result, other students, faculty, and community members are engaged to take action on an issue. • The student works on and takes a leadership role in a complex campaign to bring about tangible changes in the public’s awareness or education on a particular issue, or even a change in public policy. Through this process, the student demonstrates multiple types of civic action and skills. • The student integrates their academic work with community engagement, producing a tangible product (piece of legislation or policy, a business, building or civic infrastructure, water quality or scientific assessment, needs survey, research paper, service program, or organization) that has engaged community constituents and responded to community needs and assets through the process. In addition, the nature of this work lends itself to opening up the review process to include community constituents that may be a part of the work, such as teammates, colleagues, community/agency members, and those served or collaborating in the process. Glossary The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only.
- 30. 30 • Civic-identity: Whenone sees her or himself as an active participant in society with a strong commitment and responsibility to work with others towards public purposes. • Service-learning class: A course-based educational experience in which students participate in an organized service activity and reflect on the experience in such a way as to gain further understanding of course content, a broader appreciation of the discipline, and an enhanced sense of personal values and civic responsibility. • Communication skills: Listening, deliberation, negotiation, consensus building, and productive use of conflict. • Civic life: The public life of the citizen concerned with the affairs of the community and nation as contrasted with private or personal life, which is devoted to the pursuit of private and personal interests. • Politics: A process by which a group of people, whose opinions or interests might be divergent, reach collective decisions that are generally regarded as binding on the group and enforced as common policy. Political life enables people to accomplish goals they could not realize as individuals. Politics necessarily arises whenever groups of people live together, since they must always reach collective decisions of one kind or another. • Government: "The formal institutions of a society with the authority to make and implement binding decisions about such matters as the distribution of resources, allocation of benefits and burdens, and the management of conflicts." (Retrieved from the Center for Civic Engagement website, May 5, 2009.) • Civic/community contexts: Organizations, movements, campaigns, a place or locus where people and/or living creatures inhabit, which may be defined by a locality (school, national park, non-profit organization, town, state, nation) or defined by shared identity (i.e., African-Americans, North Carolinians, Americans, the Republican or Democratic Party, refugees, etc.). In addition, contexts for civic engagement may be defined by a variety of approaches intended to benefit a person, group, or community, including community service or volunteer work, academic work.
- 31. 31 CIVIC ENGAGEMENT VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Civic engagement is "working to make a difference in the civic life of our communities and developing the combination of knowledge, skills, values and motivation to make that difference. It means promoting the quality of life in a community, through both political and non-political processes." (Excerpted from Civic Responsibility and Higher Education, edited by Thomas Ehrlich, published by Oryx Press, 2000, Preface, page vi.) In addition, civic engagement encompasses actions wherein individuals participate in activities of personal and public concern that are both individually life enriching and socially beneficial to the community. Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Diversity of Communities and Cultures Demonstrates evidence of adjustment in own attitudes and beliefs because of working within and learning from diversity of communities and cultures. Promotes others' engagement with diversity. Reflects on how own attitudes and beliefs are different from those of other cultures and communities. Exhibits curiosity about what can be learned from diversity of communities and cultures. Has awareness that own attitudes and beliefs are different from those of other cultures and communities. Exhibits little curiosity about what can be learned from diversity of communities and cultures. Expresses attitudes and beliefs as an individual, from a one-sided view. Is indifferent or resistant to what can be learned from diversity of communities and cultures. Analysis of Knowledge Connects and extends knowledge (facts, theories, etc.) from one's own academic study/ field/discipline to civic engagement and to one's own participation in civic life, politics, and government. Analyzes knowledge (facts, theories, etc.) from one's own academic study/field/discipline making relevant connections to civic engagement and to one's own participation in civic life, politics, and government. Begins to connect knowledge (facts, theories, etc.) from one's own academic study/field/discipline to civic engagement and to tone's own participation in civic life, politics, and government. Begins to identify knowledge (facts, theories, etc.) from one's own academic study/field/discipline that is relevant to civic engagement and to one's own participation in civic life, politics, and government. Civic-Identity and Commitment Provides evidence of experience in civic engagement activities and describes what she/he has learned about her or himself as it relates to a reinforced and clarified sense of civic identity and continued commitment to public action. Provides evidence of experience in civic engagement activities and describes what she/he has learned about her or himself as it relates to a growing sense of civic-identity and commitment. Evidence suggests involvement in civic engagement activities is generated from expectations or course requirements rather than from a sense of civic- identity. Provides little evidence of her/his experience in civic- engagement activities and does not connect experiences to civic-identity. Civic Communication Tailors communication strategies to effectively Effectively communicates in civic context, showing ability Communicates in civic context, showing ability to do Communicates in civic context, showing ability to do
- 32. 32 express, listen, andadapt to others to establish relationships to further civic action to do all of the following: express, listen and adapt ideas and messages based on others' perspectives. more than one of the following: express, listen and adapt ideas and messages based on others' perspectives. one of the following: express, listen and adapt ideas and messages based on others' perspectives. Civic Action and Reflection Demonstrates independent experience and shows initiative in team leadership of complex or multiple civic engagement activities, accompanied by reflective insights or analysis about the aims and accomplishments of one’s actions. Demonstrates independent experience and team leadership of civic action, with reflective insights or analysis about the aims and accomplishments of one’s actions. Has clearly participated in civically-focused actions and begins to reflect or describe how these actions may benefit individual(s) or communities. Has experimented with some civic activities but shows little internalized understanding of its aims or effects and little commitment to future action. Civic Contexts/Structures Demonstrates ability and commitment to collaboratively work across and within community contexts and structures to achieve a civic aim. Demonstrates ability and commitment to work actively within community contexts and structures to achieve a civic aim. Demonstrates experience identifying intentional ways to participate in civic contexts and structures. Experiments with civic contexts and structures, tries out a few to see what fits.
- 33. 33 CREATIVE THINKING VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Creative thinking is both the capacity to combine or synthesize existing ideas, images, or expertise in original ways and the experience of thinking, reacting, and working in an imaginative way characterized by a high degree of innovation, divergent thinking, and risk taking. Framing Language Creative thinking, as it is fostered within higher education, must be distinguished from less focused types of creativity such as, for example, the creativity exhibited by a small child’s drawing, which stems not from an understanding of connections, but from an ignorance of boundaries. Creative thinking in higher education can only be expressed productively within a particular domain. The student must have a strong foundation in the strategies and skills of the domain in order to make connections and synthesize. While demonstrating solid knowledge of the domain's parameters, the creative thinker, at the highest levels of performance, pushes beyond those boundaries in new, unique, or atypical recombinations, uncovering or critically perceiving new syntheses and using or recognizing creative risk- taking to achieve a solution. The Creative Thinking VALUE Rubric is intended to help faculty assess creative thinking in a broad range of transdisciplinary or interdisciplinary work samples or collections of work. The rubric is made up of a set of attributes that are common to creative thinking across disciplines. Examples of work samples or collections of work that could be assessed for creative thinking may include research papers, lab reports, musical compositions, a mathematical equation that solves a problem, a prototype design, a reflective piece about the final product of an assignment, or other academic works. The work samples or collections of work may be completed by an individual student or a group of students. Glossary The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. • Exemplar: A model or pattern to be copied or imitated (quoted from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/exemplar). • Domain: Field of study or activity and a sphere of knowledge and influence.
- 34. 34 CREATIVE THINKING VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Creative thinking is both the capacity to combine or synthesize existing ideas, images, or expertise in original ways and the experience of thinking, reacting, and working in an imaginative way characterized by a high degree of innovation, divergent thinking, and risk taking. Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Acquiring competencies This step refers to acquiring strategies and skills within a particular domain. Reflect: Evaluates creative process and product using domain-appropriate criteria. Create: Creates an entirely new object, solution or idea that is appropriate to the domain. Adapt: Successfully adapts an appropriate exemplar to his/her own specifications. Model: Successfully reproduces an appropriate exemplar. Taking risks May include personal risk (fear of embarrassment or rejection) or risk of failure in successfully completing assignment, i.e. going beyond original parameters of assignment, introducing new materials and forms, tackling controversial topics, advocating unpopular ideas or solutions. Actively seeks out and follows through on untested and potentially risky directions or approaches to the assignment in the final product. Incorporates new directions or approaches to the assignment in the final product. Considers new directions or approaches without going beyond the guidelines of the assignment. Stays strictly within the guidelines of the assignment. Solving Problems Not only develops a logical, consistent plan to solve problem, but recognizes consequences of solution and can articulate reason for choosing solution. Having selected from among alternatives, develops a logical, consistent plan to solve the problem. Considers and rejects less acceptable approaches to solving problem. Only a single approach is considered and is used to solve the problem. Embracing Integrates alternate, Incorporates alternate, Includes (recognizes the Acknowledges (mentions
- 35. 35 Contradictions divergent orcontradictory perspectives or ideas fully. divergent or contradictory perspectives or ideas in a exploratory way. value of) alternate, divergent or contradictory perspectives or ideas in a small way. in passing) alternate, divergent, or contradictory perspectives or ideas. Innovative Thinking Novelty or Uniqueness (of Idea, Claim, Question, Form, etc.) Extends a novel or unique idea, question, format, or product to create new knowledge or knowledge that crosses boundaries. Creates a novel or unique idea, question, format, or product. Experiments with creating a novel or unique idea, question, format, or product. Reformulates a collection of available ideas. Connecting, Synthesizing, Transforming Transforms ideas or solutions into entirely new forms. Synthesizes ideas or solutions into a coherent whole. Connects ideas or solutions in novel ways. Recognizes existing connections among ideas or solutions.
- 36. 36 CRITICAL THINKING VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Critical thinking is a habit of mind characterized by the comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events before accepting or formulating an opinion or conclusion. Framing Language This rubric is designed to be transdisciplinary, reflecting the recognition that success in all disciplines requires habits of inquiry and analysis that share common attributes. Further, research suggests that successful critical thinkers from all disciplines increasingly need to be able to apply those habits in various and changing situations encountered in all walks of life. This rubric is designed for use with many different types of assignments and the suggestions here are not an exhaustive list of possibilities. Critical thinking can be demonstrated in assignments that require students to complete analyses of text, data, or issues. Assignments that cut across presentation mode might be especially useful in some fields. If insight into the process components of critical thinking (e.g., how information sources were evaluated regardless of whether they were included in the product) is important, assignments focused on student reflection might be especially illuminating. Glossary The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. • Ambiguity: Information that may be interpreted in more than one way. • Assumptions: Ideas, conditions, or beliefs (often implicit or unstated) that are "taken for granted or accepted as true without proof." (quoted from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/assumptions) • Context: The historical, ethical. political, cultural, environmental, or circumstantial settings or conditions that influence and complicate the consideration of any issues, ideas, artifacts, and events. • Literal meaning: Interpretation of information exactly as stated. For example, "she was green with envy" would be interpreted to mean that her skin was green. • Metaphor: Information that is (intended to be) interpreted in a non-literal way. For example, "she was green with envy" is intended to convey an intensity of emotion, not a skin color.
- 37. 37 CRITICAL THINKING VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Critical thinking is a habit of mind characterized by the comprehensive exploration of issues, ideas, artifacts, and events before accepting or formulating an opinion or conclusion. Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Explanation of issues Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated clearly and described comprehensively, delivering all relevant information necessary for full understanding. Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated, described and clarified so that understanding is not seriously impeded by omissions. Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated but description leaves some terms undefined, ambiguities unexplored, boundaries undetermined, and/or backgrounds unknown. Issue/problem to be considered critically is stated without clarification or description. Evidence Selecting and using information to investigate a point of view or conclusion Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation, to develop a comprehensive analysis or synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are questioned thoroughly. Information is taken from source(s) with enough interpretation/evaluation to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are subject to questioning. Information is taken from source(s) with some interpretation/evaluation, but not enough to develop a coherent analysis or synthesis. Viewpoints of experts are taken as mostly fact, with little questioning. Information is taken from source(s) without any interpretation/evaluation. Viewpoints of experts are taken as fact, without question. Influence of context and assumptions Thoroughly (systematically and methodically) analyzes own and others' assumptions and carefully evaluates the relevance of contexts when presenting a position. Identifies own and others' assumptions and several relevant contexts when presenting a position. Questions some assumptions. Identifies several relevant contexts when presenting a position. May be more aware of others' assumptions than one's own (or vice versa). Shows an emerging awareness of present assumptions (sometimes labels assertions as assumptions). Begins to identify some contexts when presenting a position
- 38. 38 Student's position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis)is imaginative, taking into account the complexities of an issue. Limits of position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) are acknowledged. Others' points of view are synthesized within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis). Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) takes into account the complexities of an issue. Others' points of view are acknowledged within position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis). Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) acknowledges different sides of an issue. Specific position (perspective, thesis/hypothesis) is stated, but is simplistic and obvious. Conclusions and related outcomes (implications and consequences) Conclusions and related outcomes (consequences and implications) are logical and reflect student’s informed evaluation and ability to place evidence and perspectives discussed in priority order Conclusion is logically tied to a range of information, including opposing viewpoints; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly. Conclusion is logically tied to information (because information is chosen to fit the desired conclusion); some related outcomes (consequences and implications) are identified clearly. Conclusion is inconsistently tied to some of the information discussed; related outcomes (consequences and implications) are oversimplified.
- 39. 39 ETHICAL REASONING VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Ethical Reasoning is reasoning about right and wrong human conduct. It requires students to be able to assess their own ethical values and the social context of problems, recognize ethical issues in a variety of settings, think about how different ethical perspectives might be applied to ethical dilemmas and consider the ramifications of alternative actions. Students’ ethical self identity evolves as they practice ethical decision-making skills and learn how to describe and analyze positions on ethical issues. Framing Language This rubric is intended to help faculty evaluate work samples and collections of work that demonstrate student learning about ethics. Although the goal of a liberal education should be to help students turn what they’ve learned in the classroom into action, pragmatically it would be difficult, if not impossible, to judge whether or not students would act ethically when faced with real ethical situations. What can be evaluated using a rubric is whether students have the intellectual tools to make ethical choices. The rubric focuses on five elements: Ethical Self Awareness, Ethical Issue Recognition, Understanding Different Ethical Perspectives/Concepts, Application of Ethical Principles, and Evaluation of Different Ethical Perspectives/Concepts. Students’ Ethical Self Identity evolves as they practice ethical decision-making skills and learn how to describe and analyze positions on ethical issues. Presumably, they will choose ethical actions when faced with ethical issues. Glossary The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. • Core Beliefs: Those fundamental principles that consciously or unconsciously influence one's ethical conduct and ethical thinking. Even when unacknowledged, core beliefs shape one's responses. Core beliefs can reflect one's environment, religion, culture or training. A person may or may not choose to act on their core beliefs. • Ethical Perspectives/concepts: The different theoretical means through which ethical issues are analyzed, such as ethical theories (e.g., utilitarian, natural law, virtue) or ethical concepts (e.g., rights, justice, duty). • Complex, multi-layered (grey) context: The sub-parts or situational conditions of a scenario that bring two or more ethical dilemmas (issues) into the mix/problem/context/for student's identification. • Cross-relationships among the issues: Obvious or subtle connections between/among the sub-parts or situational conditions of the issues present in a scenario (e.g., relationship of production of corn as part of climate change issue).
- 40. 40 ETHICAL REASONING VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Ethical Reasoning is reasoning about right and wrong human conduct. It requires students to be able to assess their own ethical values and the social context of problems, recognize ethical issues in a variety of settings, think about how different ethical perspectives might be applied to ethical dilemmas and consider the ramifications of alternative actions. Students’ ethical self identity evolves as they practice ethical decision-making skills and learn how to describe and analyze positions on ethical issues. Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Ethical Self Awareness Student discusses in detail/analyzes both core beliefs and the origins of the core beliefs and discussion has greater depth and clarity. Student discusses in detail/analyzes both core beliefs and the origins of the core beliefs. Student states both core beliefs and the origins of the core beliefs. Student states either their core beliefs or articulates the origins of the core beliefs but not both. Understanding Different Ethical Perspectives/Concepts Student names the theory or theories, can present the gist of said theory or theories, and accurately explains the details of the theory or theories used. Student can name the major theory or theories she/he uses, can present the gist of said theory or theories, and attempts to explain the details of the theory or theories used, but has some inaccuracies. Student can name the major theory she/he uses, and is only able to present the gist of the named theory. Student only names the major theory she/he uses. Ethical Issue Recognition Student can recognize ethical issues when presented in a complex, multi-layered (grey) context AND can recognize cross-relationships among the issues. Student can recognize ethical issues when issues are presented in a complex, multilayered (grey) context OR can grasp cross- relationships among the issues. Student can recognize basic and obvious ethical issues and grasp (incompletely) the complexities or inter- relationships among the issues. Student can recognize basic and obvious ethical issues but fails to grasp complexity or inter-relationships. Application of Ethical Perspectives/Concepts Student can independently apply ethical perspectives/concepts to an ethical question, accurately, and is able to consider full implications of the application. Student can independently (to a new example) apply ethical perspectives/concepts to an ethical question, accurately, but does not consider the specific implications of the application. Student can apply ethical perspectives/concepts to an ethical question, independently (to a new example) and the application is inaccurate. Student can apply ethical perspectives/concepts to an ethical question with support (using examples, in a class, in a group, or a fixed-choice setting) but is unable to apply ethical perspectives/concepts independently (to a new example.). Evaluation of Different Ethical Student states a position and can state the objections to, Student states a position and can state the objections to, Student states a position and can state the objections to, Student states a position but cannot state the objections to
- 41. 41 Perspectives/Concepts assumptions andimplications of and can reasonably defend against the objections to, assumptions and implications of different ethical perspectives/concepts and the student's defense is adequate and effective. assumptions and implications and respond to the objections to, assumptions and implications of different ethical perspectives/concepts but the student's response is inadequate. assumptions and implications of different ethical perspectives/concepts but does not respond to them (and ultimately objections, assumptions and implications are compartmentalized by student and do not affect student's position.) and assumptions and limitations of the different perspectives/concepts.
- 42. 42 INFORMATION LITERACY VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition The ability to know when there is a need for information, to be able to identify, locate, evaluate, and effectively and responsibly use and share that information for the problem at hand. -Adopted from The National Forum on Information Literacy Framing Language This rubric is recommended for use evaluating a collection of work, rather than a single work sample in order to fully gauge students’ information skills. Ideally, a collection of work would contain a wide variety of different types of work and might include: research papers, editorials, speeches, grant proposals, marketing or business plans, PowerPoint presentations, posters, literature reviews, position papers, and argument critiques to name a few. In addition, a description of the assignments with the instructions that initiated the student work would be vital in providing the complete context for the work. Although a student’s final work must stand on its own, evidence of a student’s research and information gathering processes, such as a research journal/diary, could provide further demonstration of a student’s information proficiency and for some criteria on this rubric would be required.
- 43. 43 INFORMATION LITERACY VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition The ability to know when there is a need for information, to be able to identify, locate, evaluate, and effectively and responsibly use and share that information for the problem at hand. - The National Forum on Information Literacy Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance . Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Determine the extent of information needed Effectively defines the scope of the research question or thesis. Effectively determines key concepts. Types of information (sources) selected directly relate to concepts or answer research question. Defines the scope of the research question or thesis completely. Can determine key concepts. Types of information (sources) selected relate to concepts or answer research question. Defines the scope of the research question or thesis incompletely (parts are missing, remains too broad or too narrow, etc.). Can determine key concepts. Types of information (sources) selected partially relate to concepts or answer research question. Has difficulty defining the scope of the research question or thesis. Has difficulty determining key concepts. Types of information (sources) selected do not relate to concepts or answer research question. Access the needed information Accesses information using effective, well-designed search strategies and most appropriate information sources. Accesses information using variety of search strategies and some relevant information sources. Demonstrates ability to refine search. Accesses information using simple search strategies, retrieves information from limited and similar sources. Accesses information randomly, retrieves information that lacks relevance and quality. Evaluate information and its sources critically Thoroughly (systematically and methodically) analyzes own and others' assumptions and carefully evaluates the relevance of contexts when presenting a position. Identifies own and others' assumptions and several relevant contexts when presenting a position. Questions some assumptions. Identifies several relevant contexts when presenting a position. May be more aware of others' assumptions than one's own (or vice versa). Shows an emerging awareness of present assumptions (sometimes labels assertions as assumptions). Begins to identify some contexts when presenting a position.
- 44. 44 Use information effectively toaccomplish a specific purpose Communicates, organizes and synthesizes information from sources to fully achieve a specific purpose, with clarity and depth Communicates, organizes and synthesizes information from sources. Intended purpose is achieved. Communicates and organizes information from sources. The information is not yet synthesized, so the intended purpose is not fully achieved. Communicates information from sources. The information is fragmented and/or used inappropriately (misquoted, taken out of context, or incorrectly paraphrased, etc.), so the intended purpose is not achieved. Access and use information ethically and legally Students use correctly all of the following information use strategies (use of citations and references; choice of paraphrasing, summary, or quoting; using information in ways that are true to original context; distinguishing between common knowledge and ideas requiring attribution) and demonstrate a full understanding of the ethical and legal restrictions on the use of published, confidential and/or proprietary information. Students use correctly three of the following information use strategies (use of citations and references; choice of paraphrasing, summary, or quoting; using information in ways that are true to original context; distinguishing between common knowledge and ideas requiring attribution) and demonstrates a full understanding of the ethical and legal restrictions on the use of published, confidential and/or proprietary information. Students use correctly two of the following information use strategies (use of citations and references; choice of paraphrasing, summary, or quoting; using information in ways that are true to original context; distinguishing between common knowledge and ideas requiring attribution) and demonstrates a full understanding of the ethical and legal restrictions on the use of published, confidential and/or proprietary information. Students use correctly one of the following information use strategies (use of citations and references; choice of paraphrasing, summary, or quoting; using information in ways that are true to original context; distinguishing between common knowledge and ideas requiring attribution) and demonstrates a full understanding of the ethical and legal restrictions on the use of published, confidential and/or proprietary information.
- 45. 45 INQUIRY AND ANALYSISVALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Inquiry is a systematic process of exploring issues, objects or works through the collection and analysis of evidence that results in informed conclusions or judgments. Analysis is the process of breaking complex topics or issues into parts to gain a better understanding of them. Framing Language This rubric is designed for use in a wide variety of disciplines. Since the terminology and process of inquiry are discipline-specific, an effort has been made to use broad language which reflects multiple approaches and assignments while addressing the fundamental elements of sound inquiry and analysis (including topic selection, existing, knowledge, design, analysis, etc.) The rubric language assumes that the inquiry and analysis process carried out by the student is appropriate for the discipline required. For example, if analysis using statistical methods is appropriate for the discipline then a student would be expected to use an appropriate statistical methodology for that analysis. If a student does not use a discipline-appropriate process for any criterion, that work should receive a performance rating of "1" or "0" for that criterion. In addition, this rubric addresses the products of analysis and inquiry, not the processes themselves. The complexity of inquiry and analysis tasks is determined in part by how much information or guidance is provided to a student and how much the student constructs. The more the student constructs, the more complex the inquiry process. For this reason, while the rubric can be used if the assignments or purposes for work are unknown, it will work most effectively when those are known. Finally, faculty are encouraged to adapt the essence and language of each rubric criterion to the disciplinary or interdisciplinary context to which it is applied. Glossary The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. • Conclusions: A synthesis of key findings drawn from research/evidence. • Limitations: Critique of the process or evidence. • Implications: How inquiry results apply to a larger context or the real world.
- 46. 46 INQUIRY AND ANALYSISVALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Inquiry is a systematic process of exploring issues/objects/works through the collection and analysis of evidence that result in informed conclusions/judgments. Analysis is the process of breaking complex topics or issues into parts to gain a better understanding of them. Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Topic selection Identifies a creative, focused, and manageable topic that addresses potentially significant yet previously less explored aspects of the topic. Identifies a focused and manageable/doable topic that appropriately addresses relevant aspects of the topic. Identifies a topic that while manageable/doable, is too narrowly focused and leaves out relevant aspects of the topic. Identifies a topic that is far too general and wide-ranging as to be manageable and doable. Existing knowledge, research, and/or views Synthesizes in depth information from relevant sources representing various points of view/approaches. Presents in depth information from relevant sources representing various points of view/approaches. Presents information from relevant sources representing limited points of view/approaches. Presents information from irrelevant sources representing limited points of view/approaches. Design process All elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are skillfully developed. Appropriate methodology or theoretical frameworks may be synthesized from across disciplines or from relevant sub-disciplines. Critical elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are appropriately developed however more subtle elements are ignored or unaccounted for. Critical elements of the methodology or theoretical framework are missing, incorrectly developed or unfocused. Inquiry design demonstrates a misunderstanding of the methodology or theoretical framework. Analysis Organizes and synthesizes evidence to reveal insightful patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus. Organizes evidence to reveal important patterns, differences, or similarities related to focus. Organizes evidence but the organization is not effective in revealing important patterns, differences or similarities. Lists evidence but it is not organized and/or is unrelated to focus.
- 47. 47 Conclusions States aconclusion that is a logical extrapolation from the inquiry findings. States a conclusion focused solely on the inquiry findings. The conclusion arises specifically from and responds specifically to the inquiry findings. States a general conclusion that, because it is so general, also applies beyond the scope of the inquiry findings. States an ambiguous, illogical or unsupportable conclusion from inquiry findings. Limitations and implications Insightfully discusses in detail relevant and supported limitations and implications Discusses relevant and supported limitations and implications Presents relevant and supported limitations and implications Presents limitations and implications, but they are possibly irrelevant and unsupported
- 48. 48 INTEGRATIVE LEARNING VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Integrative learning is an understanding and a disposition that a student builds across the curriculum and co-curriculum, from making simple connections among ideas and experiences to synthesizing and transferring learning to new, complex situations within and beyond the campus. Framing Language Fostering students’ abilities to integrate learning—across courses, over time, and between campus and community life—is one of the most important goals and challenges for higher education. Initially, students connect previous learning to new classroom learning. Later, significant knowledge within individual disciplines serves as the foundation, but integrative learning goes beyond academic boundaries. Indeed, integrative experiences often occur as learners address real-world problems , unscripted and sufficiently broad, to require multiple areas of knowledge and multiple modes of inquiry, offering multiple solutions and benefiting from multiple perspectives. Integrative learning also involves internal changes in the learner. These internal changes, which indicate growth as a confident, lifelong learner, include the ability to adapt one's intellectual skills, to contribute in a wide variety of situations, and to understand and develop individual purpose, values and ethics. Developing students’ capacities for integrative learning is central to personal success, social responsibility, and civic engagement in today’s global society. Students face a rapidly changing and increasingly connected world where integrative learning becomes not just a benefit...but a necessity. Because integrative learning is about making connections, this learning may not be as evident in traditional academic artifacts such as research papers and academic projects unless the student, for example, is prompted to draw implications for practice. These connections often surface, however, in reflective work, self assessment, or creative endeavors of all kinds. Integrative assignments foster learning between courses or by connecting courses to experientially-based work. Work samples or collections of work that include such artifacts give evidence of integrative learning. Faculty are encouraged to look for evidence that the student connects the learning gained in classroom study to learning gained in real life situations that are related to other learning experiences, extra-curricular activities, or work. Through integrative learning, students pull together their entire experience inside and outside of the formal classroom; thus, artificial barriers between formal study and informal or tacit learning become permeable. Integrative learning, whatever the context or source, builds upon connecting both theory and practice toward a deepened understanding. Assignments to foster such connections and understanding could include, for example, composition papers that focus on topics from biology, economics, or history; mathematics assignments that apply mathematical tools to important issues and require written analysis to explain the implications and limitations of the mathematical treatment, or art history presentations that demonstrate aesthetic connections between selected paintings and novels. In this regard, some majors (e.g., interdisciplinary majors or problem-based field studies) seem to inherently evoke characteristics of integrative learning and result in work samples or collections of work that significantly demonstrate this outcome. However, fields of study that require accumulation of extensive and high-consensus content knowledge (such as accounting, engineering, or chemistry) also involve the kinds of complex and integrative constructions (e.g., ethical dilemmas and social consciousness) that seem to be highlighted so extensively in self reflection in arts and humanities, but they may be embedded in individual performances and less evident. The key in the development of such work samples or collections of work will be in designing structures that include artifacts and reflective writing or feedback that support students' examination of their learning and give evidence that, as graduates, they will extend their integrative abilities into the challenges of personal, professional, and civic life.
- 49. 49 Glossary The definitions thatfollow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. • Academic knowledge: Disciplinary learning; learning from academic study, texts, etc. • Content: The information conveyed in the work samples or collections of work. • Contexts: Actual or simulated situations in which a student demonstrates learning outcomes. New and challenging contexts encourage students to stretch beyond their current frames of reference. • Co-curriculum: A parallel component of the academic curriculum that is in addition to formal classroom (student government, community service, residence hall activities, student organizations, etc.). • Experience: Learning that takes place in a setting outside of the formal classroom, such as workplace, service learning site, internship site or another. • Form: The external frameworks in which information and evidence are presented, ranging from choices for particular work sample or collection of works (such as a research paper, PowerPoint, video recording, etc.) to choices in make-up of the eportfolio. • Performance: A dynamic and sustained act that brings together knowing and doing (creating a painting, solving an experimental design problem, developing a public relations strategy for a business, etc.); performance makes learning observable. • Reflection: A meta-cognitive act of examining a performance in order to explore its significance and consequences. • Self Assessment: Describing, interpreting, and judging a performance based on stated or implied expectations followed by planning for further learning.
- 50. 50 INTEGRATIVE LEARNING VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Integrative learning is an understanding and a disposition that a student builds across the curriculum and co-curriculum, from making simple connections among ideas and experiences to synthesizing and transferring learning to new, complex situations within and beyond the campus. Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Connections to experience Connects relevant experience and academic knowledge Meaningfully synthesizes connections among experiences outside of the formal classroom (including life experiences and academic experiences such as internships and travel abroad) to deepen understanding of fields of study and to broaden own points of view. Effectively selects and develops examples of life experiences, drawn from a variety of contexts (e.g. family life, artistic participation, civic involvement, work experience), to illuminate concepts/theories/ frameworks of fields of study. Compares life experiences and academic knowledge to infer differences, as well as similarities, and acknowledge perspectives other than own. Identifies connections between life experiences and those academic texts and ideas perceived as similar and related to own interests. Connections to discipline Sees (makes) connections across disciplines, perspectives Independently creates wholes out of multiple parts (synthesizes) or draws conclusions by combining examples, facts, or theories from more than one field of study or perspective. Independently connects examples, facts, or theories from more than one field of study or perspective. When prompted, connects examples, facts, or theories from more than one field of study or perspective. When prompted, presents examples, facts, or theories from more than one field of study or perspective. Transfer Adapts and applies skills, abilities, theories, or methodologies gained in one situation to new situations Adapts and applies, independently, skills, abilities, theories, or methodologies gained in one situation to new situations to solve difficult problems or explore complex issues in original ways. Adapts and applies skills, abilities, theories, or methodologies gained in one situation to new situations to solve problems or explore issues. Uses skills, abilities, theories, or methodologies gained in one situation in a new situation to contribute to understanding of problems or issues. Uses, in a basic way, skills, abilities, theories, or methodologies gained in one situation in a new situation.
- 51. 51 INTERCULTURAL KNOWLEDGE ANDCOMPETENCE VALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Intercultural Knowledge and Competence is "a set of cognitive, affective, and behavioral skills and characteristics that support effective and appropriate interaction in a variety of cultural contexts.” (Bennett, J. M. (2008). "Transformative training: Designing programs for culture learning." In M. A. Moodian (Ed.), Contemporary leadership and intercultural competence: Understanding and utilizing cultural diversity to build successful organizations (pp. 95- 110). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.) Framing Language The call to integrate intercultural knowledge and competence into the heart of education is an imperative born of seeing ourselves as members of a world community, knowing that we share the future with others. Beyond mere exposure to culturally different others, the campus community requires the capacity to: meaningfully engage those others, place social justice in historical and political context, and put culture at the core of transformative learning. The intercultural knowledge and competence rubric suggests a systematic way to measure our capacity to identify our own cultural patterns, compare and contrast them with others, and adapt empathically and flexibly to unfamiliar ways of being. The levels of this rubric are informed in part by M. Bennett's Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (Bennett, M.J. (1993), "Towards Ethnorelativism: A Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity". In R. M. Paige (Ed.) Education for the Intercultural Experience (pp. 22-71). Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press). In addition, the criteria in this rubric are informed in part by D.K. Deardorff's intercultural framework which is the first research-based consensus model of intercultural competence (Deardorff, D.K. 2006, "The identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student outcome of internationalization" in Journal of Studies in International Education, Vol. 10, No. 3, 241-266). It is also important to understand that intercultural knowledge and competence is more complex than what is reflected in this rubric. This rubric identifies six of the key components of intercultural knowledge and competence, but there are other components as identified in the Deardorff model and in other research. Glossary The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. • Culture: All knowledge and values shared by a group. • Cultural rules and biases: Boundaries within which an individual operates in order to feel a sense of belonging to a society or group, based on the values shared by that society or group. • Empathy: "Empathy is the imaginary participation in another person’s experience, including emotional and intellectual dimensions, by imagining his or her perspective (not by assuming the person’s position)". Bennett, J. 1998. Transition shock: Putting culture shock in perspective. In Bennett, M., Ed. Basic concepts of intercultural communication. Yarmouth ME: Intercultural Press, 215 – 224. • Intercultural experience: The experience of an interaction with an individual or groups of people whose culture is different from your own.
- 52. 52 • Intercultural/cultural differences:The differences in rules, behaviors, communication and biases, based on cultural values that are different from one's own culture. • Suspends judgment in valuing their interactions with culturally different others: Postpones assessment or evaluation (positive or negative) of interactions with people culturally different from one self. Disconnecting from the process of automatic judgment and taking time to reflect on possibly multiple meanings. • Worldview: Worldview is the cognitive and affective lens through which people construe their experiences and make sense of the world around them.
- 53. 53 INTERCULTURAL KNOWLEDGE ANDCOMPETENCE VALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Intercultural Knowledge and Competence is "a set of cognitive, affective, and behavioral skills and characteristics that support effective and appropriate interaction in a variety of cultural contexts.” (Bennett, J. M. (2008). "Transformative training: Designing programs for culture learning." In M. A. Moodian (Ed.), Contemporary leadership and intercultural competence: Understanding and utilizing cultural diversity to build successful organizations (pp. 95-110). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.) Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Knowledge Cultural self- awareness Articulates insights into own cultural rules and biases (e.g. seeking complexity; aware of how her/his experiences have shaped these rules, and how to recognize and respond to cultural biases, resulting in a shift in self-description.) Recognizes new perspectives about own cultural rules and biases (e.g. not looking for sameness; comfortable with the complexities that new perspectives offer.) Identifies own cultural rules and biases (e.g. with a strong preference for those rules shared with own cultural group and seeks the same in others.) Shows minimal awareness of own cultural rules and biases (even those shared with own cultural group(s)) (e.g. uncomfortable with identifying possible cultural differences with others.) Knowledge Knowledge of cultural worldview frameworks Demonstrates sophisticated understanding of the complexity of elements important to members of another culture in relation to its history, values, politics, communication styles, economy, or beliefs & practices. Demonstrates adequate understanding of the complexity of elements important to members of another culture in relation to its history, values, politics, communication styles, economy, or beliefs & practices. Demonstrates partial understanding of the complexity of elements important to members of another culture in relation to its history, values, politics, communication styles, economy, or beliefs & practices. Demonstrates surface understanding of the complexity of elements important to members of another culture in relation to its history, values, politics, communication styles, economy, or beliefs & practices. Skills Empathy Interprets intercultural experience from the perspectives of own and more than one worldview and demonstrates ability to act in a supportive manner that recognizes the feelings of another cultural group Recognizes intellectual and emotional dimensions of more than one worldview and sometimes uses more than one worldview in interactions Identifies components of other cultural perspectives but responds in all situations with own worldview Views the experience of others but does so through own cultural worldview
- 54. 54 Skills Verbal and non-verbal communication Articulatesa complex understanding of cultural differences in verbal and nonverbal communication (e.g., demonstrates understanding of the degree to which people use physical contact while communicating in different cultures or use direct/indirect and explicit/implicit meanings) and is able to skillfully negotiate a shared understanding based on those differences. Recognizes and participates in cultural differences in verbal and nonverbal communication and begins to negotiate a shared understanding based on those differences. Identifies some cultural differences in verbal and nonverbal communication and is aware that misunderstandings can occur based on those differences but is still unable to negotiate a shared understanding. Has a minimal level of understanding of cultural differences in verbal and nonverbal communication; is unable to negotiate a shared understanding. Attitudes Curiosity Asks complex questions about other cultures, seeks out and articulates answers to those questions which reflect multiple cultural perspectives Asks deeper questions about other cultures and seeks out answers to those questions Asks simple or surface questions about other cultures States minimal interest in learning more about other cultures Attitudes Openness Initiates and develops interactions with culturally different others. Suspends judgment in valuing her/his interactions with culturally different others. Begins to initiate and develop interactions with culturally different others. Begins to suspend judgment in her/his valuing interactions with culturally different others. Expresses openness to most if not all interactions with culturally different others. Has difficulty suspending any judgment in her/his interactions with culturally different others, and is aware of own judgment and expresses a willingness to change. Receptive to interacting with culturally different others. Has difficulty suspending any judgment in her/his interactions with culturally different others, but is unaware of own judgment.
- 55. 55 ORAL COMMUNICATION VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org The type of oral communication most likely to be included in a collection of student work is an oral presentation and therefore is the focus for the application of this rubric. Definition Oral communication is a prepared, purposeful presentation designed to increase knowledge, to foster understanding, or to promote change in the listeners' attitudes, values, beliefs, or behaviors. Framing Language Oral communication takes many forms. This rubric is specifically designed to evaluate oral presentations of a single speaker at a time and is best applied to live or video-recorded presentations. For panel presentations or group presentations, it is recommended that each speaker be evaluated separately. This rubric best applies to presentations of sufficient length such that a central message is conveyed, supported by one or more forms of supporting materials and includes a purposeful organization. An oral answer to a single question not designed to be structured into a presentation does not readily apply to this rubric. Glossary The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. • Central message: The main point/thesis/"bottom line"/"take-away" of a presentation. A clear central message is easy to identify; a compelling central message is also vivid and memorable. • Delivery techniques: Posture, gestures, eye contact, and use of the voice. Delivery techniques enhance the effectiveness of the presentation when the speaker stands and moves with authority, looks more often at the audience than at his/her speaking materials/notes, uses the voice expressively, and uses few vocal fillers ("um," "uh," "like," "you know," etc.). • Language: Vocabulary, terminology, and sentence structure. Language that supports the effectiveness of a presentation is appropriate to the topic and audience, grammatical, clear, and free from bias. Language that enhances the effectiveness of a presentation is also vivid, imaginative, and expressive. • Organization: The grouping and sequencing of ideas and supporting material in a presentation. An organizational pattern that supports the effectiveness of a presentation typically includes an introduction, one or more identifiable sections in the body of the speech, and a conclusion. An organizational pattern that enhances the effectiveness of the presentation reflects a purposeful choice among possible alternatives, such as a chronological pattern, a problem-solution pattern, an analysis-of-parts pattern, etc., that makes the content of the presentation easier to follow and more likely to accomplish its purpose. • Supporting material: Explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, analogies, quotations from relevant authorities, and other kinds of information or analysis that supports the principal ideas of the presentation. Supporting material is generally credible when it is relevant and derived from
- 56. 56 reliable and appropriatesources. Supporting material is highly credible when it is also vivid and varied across the types listed above (e.g., a mix of examples, statistics, and references to authorities). Supporting material may also serve the purpose of establishing the speakers credibility. For example, in presenting a creative work such as a dramatic reading of Shakespeare, supporting evidence may not advance the ideas of Shakespeare, but rather serve to establish the speaker as a credible Shakespearean actor.
- 57. 57 ORAL COMMUNICATION VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Oral communication is a prepared, purposeful presentation designed to increase knowledge, to foster understanding, or to promote change in the listeners' attitudes, values, beliefs, or behaviors . Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Organization Organizational pattern (specific introduction and conclusion, sequenced material within the body, and transitions) is clearly and consistently observable and is skillful and makes the content of the presentation cohesive. Organizational pattern (specific introduction and conclusion, sequenced material within the body, and transitions) is clearly and consistently observable within the presentation. Organizational pattern (specific introduction and conclusion, sequenced material within the body, and transitions) is intermittently observable within the presentation. Organizational pattern (specific introduction and conclusion, sequenced material within the body, and transitions) is not observable within the presentation. Language Language choices are imaginative, memorable and compelling and enhance the effectiveness of the presentation. Language in presentation is appropriate to audience. Language choices are thoughtful and generally support the effectiveness of the presentation. Language in presentation is appropriate to audience. Language choices are mundane and commonplace and partially support the effectiveness of the presentation. Language in presentation is appropriate to audience. Language choices are unclear and minimally support the effectiveness of the presentation. Language in presentation is not appropriate to audience.
- 58. 58 Delivery Delivery techniques (posture,gesture, eye contact, and vocal expressiveness) make the presentation compelling, and speaker appears polished and confident. Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, and vocal expressiveness) make the presentation interesting, and speaker appears comfortable. Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, and vocal expressiveness) make the presentation understandable, and speaker appears tentative. Delivery techniques (posture, gesture, eye contact, and vocal expressiveness) detract from the understandability of the presentation, and speaker appears uncomfortable. Supporting Material A variety of types of supporting materials (explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, analogies, quotations from relevant authorities) make appropriate reference to information or analysis which significantly supports the presentation or establishes the presenter's credibility/authority on the topic. Supporting materials (explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, analogies, quotations from relevant authorities) make appropriate reference to information or analysis which generally supports the presentation or establishes the presenter's credibility/authority on the topic. Supporting materials (explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, analogies, quotations from relevant authorities) make appropriate reference to information or analysis which partially supports the presentation or establishes the presenter's credibility/authority on the topic. Insufficient supporting materials (explanations, examples, illustrations, statistics, analogies, quotations from relevant authorities) make reference to information or analysis which minimally supports the presentation or establishes the presenter's credibility/authority on the topic. Central Message Central message is compelling (precisely stated, appropriately repeated, memorable, and strongly supported.) Central message is clear and consistent with the supporting material. Central message is basically understandable but is not often repeated and is not memorable. Central message can be deduced, but is not explicitly stated in the presentation.
- 59. 59 PROBLEM SOLVING VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Problem solving is the process of designing, evaluating and implementing a strategy to answer an open-ended question or achieve a desired goal. Framing Language Problem-solving covers a wide range of activities that may vary significantly across disciplines. Activities that encompass problem-solving by students may involve problems that range from well-defined to ambiguous in a simulated or laboratory context, or in real-world settings. This rubric distills the common elements of most problem-solving contexts and is designed to function across all disciplines. It is broad-based enough to allow for individual differences among learners, yet is concise and descriptive in its scope to determine how well students have maximized their respective abilities to practice thinking through problems in order to reach solutions. This rubric is designed to measure the quality of a process, rather than the quality of an end-product. As a result, work samples or collections of work will need to include some evidence of the individual’s thinking about a problem-solving task (e.g., reflections on the process from problem to proposed solution; steps in a problem-based learning assignment; record of think-aloud protocol while solving a problem). The final product of an assignment that required problem resolution is insufficient without insight into the student’s problem-solving process. Because the focus is on institutional level assessment, scoring team projects, such as those developed in capstone courses, may be appropriate as well. Glossary The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. • Contextual Factors: Constraints (such as limits on cost), resources, attitudes (such as biases) and desired additional knowledge which affect how the problem can be best solved in the real world or simulated setting. • Critique: Involves analysis and synthesis of a full range of perspectives. • Feasible: Workable, in consideration of time-frame, functionality, available resources, necessary buy-in, and limits of the assignment or task. • “Off the shelf ”solution: A simplistic option that is familiar from everyday experience but not tailored to the problem at hand (e.g. holding a bake sale to "save" an underfunded public library). • Solution: An appropriate response to a challenge or a problem. • Strategy: A plan of action or an approach designed to arrive at a solution. ( If the problem is a river that needs to be crossed, there could be a construction-oriented, cooperative (build a bridge with your community) approach and a personally-oriented, physical (swim across alone) approach. An approach that partially applies would be a personal, physical approach for someone who doesn't know how to swim. • Support: Specific rationale, evidence, etc. for solution or selection of solution.
- 60. 60 PROBLEM SOLVING VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Problem solving is the process of designing, evaluating and implementing a strategy to answer an open-ended question or achieve a desired goal. Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Define problem Demonstrates the ability to construct a clear and insightful problem statement with evidence of all relevant contextual factors. Demonstrates the ability to construct a problem statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors, and problem statement is adequately detailed. Begins to demonstrates the ability to construct a problem statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors, but problem statement is superficial. Demonstrates a limited ability in identifying a problem statement or related contextual factors. Identify strategies Identifies multiple approaches for solving the problem that apply within a specific context. Identifies multiple approaches for solving the problem, only some of which apply within a specific context. Identifies only a single approach for solving the problem that does apply within a specific context. Identifies one or more approaches for solving the problem that do not apply within a specific context. Propose solutions/hypotheses Proposes one or more solutions/hypotheses that indicates a deep comprehension of the problem. Solution/hypotheses are sensitive to contextual factors as well as all of the following: ethical, logical, and cultural dimensions of the problem. Proposes one or more solutions/hypotheses that indicates comprehension of the problem. Solutions/hypotheses are sensitive to contextual factors as well as the one of the following: ethical, logical, or cultural dimensions of the problem. Proposes one solution/hypothesis that is “off the shelf ” rather than individually designed to address the specific contextual factors of the problem. Proposes a solution/hypothesis that is difficult to evaluate because it is vague or only indirectly addresses the problem statement.
- 61. 61 Evaluate potential solutions Evaluation ofsolutions is deep and elegant (for example contains thorough and insightful explanation) includes, deeply and thoroughly, all of the following: considers history of problem, reviews logic/reasoning, examines feasibility of solution and weighs impacts of solution. Evaluation of solutions is adequate (for example contains thorough explanation) and includes the following: considers history of problem, reviews logic/reasoning, examines feasibility of solution and weighs impacts of solution. Evaluation of solutions is brief (for example explanation lacks depth) and includes the following: considers history of problem, reviews logic/reasoning, examines feasibility of solution and weighs impacts of solution. Evaluation of solutions is superficial (for example, contains cursory, surface level explanation) and includes the following: considers history of problem, reviews logic/ reasoning, examines feasibility of solution and weighs impacts of solution. Implement Solution Implements the solution in a manner that addresses thoroughly and deeply multiple contextual factors of the problem. Implements the solution in a manner that addresses multiple contextual factors of the problem in a surface manner. Implements the solution in a manner that addresses the problem statement but ignores relevant contextual factors. Implements the solution in a manner that does not directly address the problem statement. Evaluate outcomes Reviews results relative to the problem defined with thorough, specific considerations of need for further work. Reviews results relative to the problem defined with some consideration of need for further work. Reviews results in terms of the problem defined with little, if any consideration of need for further work. Reviews results superficially in terms of the problem defined with no consideration of need for further work
- 62. 62 TEAMWORK VALUE RUBRIC formore information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Teamwork is behaviors under the control of individual team members (effort they put into team tasks, their manner of interacting with others on team, and the quantity and quality of contributions they make to team discussions.) Framing Language Students participate on many different teams, in many different settings. For example, a given student may work on separate teams to complete a lab assignment, give an oral presentation, or complete a community service project. Furthermore, the people the student works with are likely to be different in each of these different teams. As a result, it is assumed that a work sample or collection of work that demonstrates a student’s teamwork skills could include a diverse range of inputs. This rubric is designed to function across all of these different settings. Two characteristics define the ways in which this rubric is to be used. First, the rubric is meant to assess the teamwork of an individual student, not the team as a whole. Therefore, it is possible for a student to receive high ratings, even if the team as a whole is rather flawed. Similarly, a student could receive low ratings, even if the team as a whole works fairly well. Second, this rubric is designed to measure the quality of a process, rather than the quality of an end-product. As a result, work samples or collections of work will need to include some evidence of the individual’s interactions within the team. The final product of the team’s work (e.g., a written lab report) is insufficient, as it does not provide insight into the functioning of the team. It is recommended that work samples or collections of work for this outcome come from one (or more) of the following three sources: (1) students' own reflections about their contribution to a team's functioning; (2) evaluation or feedback from fellow team members about students' contribution to the team's functioning; or (3) the evaluation of an outside observer regarding students' contributions to a team's functioning. These three sources differ considerably in the resource demands they place on an institution. It is recommended that institutions using this rubric consider carefully the resources they are able to allocate to the assessment of teamwork and choose a means of compiling work samples or collections of work that best suits their priorities, needs, and abilities.
- 63. 63 TEAMWORK VALUE RUBRIC formore information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Teamwork is behaviors under the control of individual team members (effort they put into team tasks, their manner of interacting with others on team, and the quantity and quality of contributions they make to team discussions.) Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance . Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Contributes to team meetings Helps the team move forward by articulating the merits of alternative ideas or proposals. Offers alternative solutions or courses of action that build on the ideas of others. Offers new suggestions to advance the work of the group. Shares ideas but does not advance the work of the group. Facilitates the contributions of team members Engages team members in ways that facilitate their contributions to meetings by both constructively building upon or synthesizing the contributions of others as well as noticing when someone is not participating and inviting them to engage. Engages team members in ways that facilitate their contributions to meetings by constructively building upon or synthesizing the contributions of others. Engages team members in ways that facilitate their contributions to meetings by restating the views of other team members and/or asking questions for clarification. Engages team members by taking turns and listening to others without interrupting. Individual contributions outside of team meetings Completes all assigned tasks by deadline; work accomplished is thorough, comprehensive and advances the project. Proactively helps other team members complete their assigned tasks to a similar level of excellence. Completes all assigned tasks by deadline; work accomplished is thorough, comprehensive and advances the project. Completes all assigned tasks by deadline; work accomplished advances the project. Completes all assigned tasks by deadline.
- 64. 64 Fosters constructive team climate Supportsa constructive team climate by doing all of the following: • Treats team members respectfully by being polite and constructive in communication. • Uses positive vocal or written tone, facial expressions, and/or body language to convey a positive attitude about the team and its work. • Motivates teammates by expressing confidence about the importance of the task and the team's ability to accomplish it. • Provides assistance and/or encouragement to team members. Supports a constructive team climate by doing any three of the following: • Treats team members respectfully by being polite and constructive in communication. • Uses positive vocal or written tone, facial expressions, and/or body language to convey a positive attitude about the team and its work. • Motivates teammates by expressing confidence about the importance of the task and the team's ability to accomplish it. • Provides assistance and/or encouragement to team members. Supports a constructive team climate by doing any two of the following: • Treats team members respectfully by being polite and constructive in communication. • Uses positive vocal or written tone, facial expressions, and/or body language to convey a positive attitude about the team and its work. • Motivates teammates by expressing confidence about the importance of the task and the team's ability to accomplish it. • Provides assistance and/or encouragement to team members. Supports a constructive team climate by doing any one of the following: • Treats team members respectfully by being polite and constructive in communication. • Uses positive vocal or written tone, facial expressions, and/or body language to convey a positive attitude about the team and its work. • Motivates teammates by expressing confidence about the importance of the task and the team's ability to accomplish it. • Provides assistance and/or encouragement to team members. Responds to conflict Addresses destructive conflict directly and constructively, helping to manage/resolve it in a way that strengthens overall team cohesiveness and future effectiveness Identifies and acknowledges conflict and stays engaged with it Redirecting focus toward common ground, toward task at hand (away from conflict) Passively accepts alternate viewpoints/ideas/opinions.
- 65. 65 QUANTITATIVE LITERACY VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Quantitative Literacy (QL) – also known as Numeracy or Quantitative Reasoning (QR) – is a "habit of mind," competency, and comfort in working with numerical data. Individuals with strong QL skills possess the ability to reason and solve quantitative problems from a wide array of authentic contexts and everyday life situations. They understand and can create sophisticated arguments supported by quantitative evidence and they can clearly communicate those arguments in a variety of formats (using words, tables, graphs, mathematical equations, etc., as appropriate). Quantitative Literacy Across the Disciplines Current trends in general education reform demonstrate that faculty are recognizing the steadily growing importance of Quantitative Literacy (QL) in an increasingly quantitative and data-dense world. AAC&U’s recent survey showed that concerns about QL skills are shared by employers, who recognize that many of today’s students will need a wide range of high level quantitative skills to complete their work responsibilities. Virtually all of today’s students, regardless of career choice, will need basic QL skills such as the ability to draw information from charts, graphs, and geometric figures, and the ability to accurately complete straightforward estimations and calculations. Preliminary efforts to find student work products which demonstrate QL skills proved a challenge in this rubric creation process. It’s possible to find pages of mathematical problems, but what those problem sets don’t demonstrate is whether the student was able to think about and understand the meaning of her work. It’s possible to find research papers that include quantitative information, but those papers often don’t provide evidence that allows the evaluator to see how much of the thinking was done by the original source (often carefully cited in the paper) and how much was done by the student herself, or whether conclusions drawn from analysis of the source material are even accurate. Given widespread agreement about the importance of QL, it becomes incumbent on faculty to develop new kinds of assignments which give students substantive, contextualized experience in using such skills as analyzing quantitative information, representing quantitative information in appropriate forms, completing calculations to answer meaningful questions, making judgments based on quantitative data and communicating the results of that work for various purposes and audiences. As students gain experience with those skills, faculty must develop assignments that require students to create work products which reveal their thought processes and demonstrate the range of their QL skills. This rubric provides for faculty a definition for QL and a rubric describing four levels of QL achievement which might be observed in work products within work samples or collections of work. Members of AAC&U’s rubric development team for QL hope that these materials will aid in the assessment of QL – but, equally important, we hope that they will help institutions and individuals in the effort to more thoroughly embed QL across the curriculum of colleges and universities.
- 66. 66 Framing Language This rubrichas been designed for the evaluation of work that addresses quantitative literacy (QL) in a substantive way. QL is not just computation, not just the citing of someone else’s data. QL is a habit of mind, a way of thinking about the world that relies on data and on the mathematical analysis of data to make connections and draw conclusions. Teaching QL requires us to design assignments that address authentic, data-based problems. Such assignments may call for the traditional written paper, but we can imagine other alternatives: a video of a PowerPoint presentation, perhaps, or a well designed series of web pages. In any case, a successful demonstration of QL will place the mathematical work in the context of a full and robust discussion of the underlying issues addressed by the assignment. Finally, QL skills can be applied to a wide array of problems of varying difficulty, confounding the use of this rubric. For example, the same student might demonstrate high levels of QL achievement when working on a simplistic problem and low levels of QL achievement when working on a very complex problem. Thus, to accurately assess a student's QL achievement it may be necessary to measure QL achievement within the context of problem complexity, much as is done in diving competitions where two scores are given, one for the difficulty of the dive, and the other for the skill in accomplishing the dive. In this context, that would mean giving one score for the complexity of the problem and another score for the QL achievement in solving the problem.
- 67. 67 QUANTITATIVE LITERACY VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Quantitative Literacy (QL) – also known as Numeracy or Quantitative Reasoning (QR) – is a "habit of mind," competency, and comfort in working with numerical data. Individuals with strong QL skills possess the ability to reason and solve quantitative problems from a wide array of authentic contexts and everyday life situations. They understand and can create sophisticated arguments supported by quantitative evidence and they can clearly communicate those arguments in a variety of formats (using words, tables, graphs, mathematical equations, etc., as appropriate). Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Interpretation Ability to explain information presented in mathematical forms (e.g., equations, graphs, diagrams, tables, words). Provides accurate explanations of information presented in mathematical forms. Makes appropriate inferences based on that information. For example, accurately explain the trend data shown in a graph and make reasonable predictions regarding what the data suggest about future events. Provides accurate explanations of information presented in mathematical forms. For instance, accurately explains the trend data shown in a graph. Provides somewhat accurate explanations of information presented in mathematical forms, but occasionally makes minor errors related to computations or units. For instance, accurately explain trend data shown in a graph, but may miscalculate the slope of the trend line. Attempts to explain information presented in mathematical forms, but draws incorrect conclusions about what the information means. For example, attempt to explain the trend data shown in a graph, but will frequently misinterpret the nature of that trend, perhaps by confusing positive and negative trends. Representation Ability to convert relevant information into various mathematical forms (e.g., equations, graphs, diagrams, tables, words). Skillfully converts relevant information into an insightful mathematical portrayal in a way that contributes to a further or deeper understanding. Competently converts relevant information into an appropriate and desired mathematical portrayal. Completes conversion of information but resulting mathematical portrayal is only partially appropriate or accurate. Completes conversion of information but resulting mathematical portrayal is inappropriate or inaccurate. Calculation Calculations attempted are essentially all successful and sufficiently comprehensive to solve the problem. Calculations are also presented elegantly (clearly, concisely, etc.) Calculations attempted are essentially all successful and sufficiently comprehensive to solve the problem. Calculations attempted are either unsuccessful or represent only a portion of the calculations required to comprehensively solve the problem. Calculations are attempted but are both unsuccessful and are not comprehensive.
- 68. 68 Application / Analysis Abilityto make judgments and draw appropriate conclusions based on the quantitative analysis of data, while recognizing the limits of this analysis. Uses the quantitative analysis of data as the basis for deep and thoughtful judgments, drawing insightful, carefully qualified conclusions from this work. Uses the quantitative analysis of data as the basis for competent judgments, drawing reasonable and appropriately qualified conclusions from this work. Uses the quantitative analysis of data as the basis for workmanlike (without inspiration or nuance, ordinary) judgments, drawing plausible conclusions from this work. Uses the quantitative analysis of data as the basis for tentative, basic judgments, although is hesitant or uncertain about drawing conclusions from this work. Assumptions Ability to make and evaluate important assumptions in estimation, modeling, and data analysis. Explicitly describes assumptions and provides compelling rationale for why each assumption is appropriate. Shows awareness that confidence in final conclusions is limited by the accuracy of the assumptions. Explicitly describes assumptions and provides compelling rationale for why assumptions are appropriate. Explicitly describes assumptions. Attempts to describe assumptions. Communication Expressing quantitative evidence in support of the argument or purpose of the work (in terms of what evidence is used and how it is formatted, presented, and contextualized). Uses quantitative information in connection with the argument or purpose of the work, presents it in an effective format, and explicates it with consistently high quality. Uses quantitative information in connection with the argument or purpose of the work, though data may be presented in a less than completely effective format or some parts of the explication may be uneven. Uses quantitative information, but does not effectively connect it to the argument or purpose of the work. Presents an argument for which quantitative evidence is pertinent, but does not provide adequate explicit numerical support. (May use quasi- quantitative words such as "many," "few," "increasing," "small," and the like in place of actual quantities.
- 69. 69 WRITTEN COMMUNICATION VALUERUBRIC [retrieved September 29, 2009 from http://www.aacu.org/value/rubrics/index.cfm] for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Written communication is the development and expression of ideas in writing. Written communication involves learning to work in many genres and styles. It can involve working with many different writing technologies, and mixing texts, data, and images. Written communication abilities develop through iterative experiences across the curriculum. Framing Language This writing rubric is designed for use in a wide variety of educational institutions. The most clear finding to emerge from decades of research on writing assessment is that the best writing assessments are locally determined and sensitive to local context and mission. Users of this rubric should, in the end, consider making adaptations and additions that clearly link the language of the rubric to individual campus contexts. This rubric focuses assessment on how specific written work samples or collections of work respond to specific contexts. The central question guiding the rubric is "How well does writing respond to the needs of audience(s) for the work?" In focusing on this question the rubric does not attend to other aspects of writing that are equally important: issues of writing process, writing strategies, writers' fluency with different modes of textual production or publication, or writer's growing engagement with writing and disciplinarity through the process of writing. Evaluators using this rubric must have information about the assignments or purposes for writing guiding writers' work. Also recommended is including reflective work samples of collections of work that address such questions as: What decisions did the writer make about audience, purpose, and genre as s/he compiled the work in the portfolio? How are those choices evident in the writing -- in the content, organization and structure, reasoning, evidence, mechanical and surface conventions, and citational systems used in the writing? This will enable evaluators to have a clear sense of how writers understand the assignments and take it into consideration as they evaluate. The first section of this rubric addresses the context and purpose for writing. A work sample or collections of work can convey the context and purpose for the writing tasks it showcases by including the writing assignments associated with work samples. But writers may also convey the context and purpose for their writing within the texts. It is important for faculty and institutions to include directions for students about how they should represent their writing contexts and purposes. Faculty interested in the research on writing assessment that has guided our work here can consult the National Council of Teachers of English/Council of Writing Program Administrators' White Paper on Writing Assessment (2008; http://www.wpacouncil.org/whitepaper) and the Conference on College Composition and Communication's Writing Assessment: A Position Statement (2008; http://www.ncte.org/cccc/resources/positions/123784.htm)
- 70. 70 Glossary The definitions thatfollow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. • Content Development: The ways in which the text explores and represents its topic in relation to its audience and purpose. • Context of and purpose for writing: The context of writing is the situation surrounding a text: who is reading it? who is writing it? Under what circumstances will the text be shared or circulated? What social or political factors might affect how the text is composed or interpreted? The purpose for writing is the writer's intended effect on an audience. Writers might want to persuade or inform; they might want to report or summarize information; they might want to work through complexity or confusion; they might want to argue with other writers, or connect with other writers; they might want to convey urgency or amuse; they might write for themselves or for an assignment or to remember. • Disciplinary conventions: Formal and informal rules that constitute what is seen generally as appropriate within different academic fields, e.g. introductory strategies, use of passive voice or first person point of view, expectations for thesis or hypothesis, expectations for kinds of evidence and support that are appropriate to the task at hand, use of primary and secondary sources to provide evidence and support arguments and to document critical perspectives on the topic. Writers will incorporate sources according to disciplinary and genre conventions, according to the writer's purpose for the text. Through increasingly sophisticated use of sources, writers develop an ability to differentiate between their own ideas and the ideas of others, credit and build upon work already accomplished in the field or issue they are addressing, and provide meaningful examples to readers. • Evidence: Source material that is used to extend, in purposeful ways, writers' ideas in a text. • Genre conventions: Formal and informal rules for particular kinds of texts and/or media that guide formatting, organization, and stylistic choices, e.g. lab reports, academic papers, poetry, webpages, or personal essays. • Sources: Texts (written, oral, behavioral, visual, or other) that writers draw on as they work for a variety of purposes -- to extend, argue with, develop, define, or shape their ideas, for example.
- 71. 71 WRITTEN COMMUNICATION VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Written communication is the development and expression of ideas in writing. Written communication involves learning to work in many genres and styles. It can involve working with many different writing technologies, and mixing texts, data, and images. Written communication abilities develop through iterative experiences across the curriculum. Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Context of and purpose for writing Includes considerations of audience, purpose, and the circumstances surrounding the writing task(s). Demonstrates a thorough understanding of context, audience, and purpose that is responsive to the assigned task(s) and focuses all elements of the work. Demonstrates adequate consideration of context, audience, and purpose and a clear focus on the assigned task(s) (e.g., the task aligns with audience, purpose, and context). Demonstrates awareness of context, audience, purpose, and to the assigned tasks(s) (e.g., begins to show awareness of audience's perceptions and assumptions). Demonstrates minimal attention to context, audience, purpose, and to the assigned tasks(s) (e.g., expectation of instructor or self as audience). Content Development Uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to illustrate mastery of the subject, conveying the writer's understanding, and shaping the whole work. Uses appropriate, relevant, and compelling content to explore ideas within the context of the discipline and shape the whole work Uses appropriate and relevant content to develop and explore ideas through most of the work. Uses appropriate and relevant content to develop simple ideas in some parts of the work. Genre and disciplinary conventions Formal and informal rules inherent in the expectations for writing in particular forms and/or academic fields (please see glossary). Demonstrates detailed attention to and successful execution of a wide range of conventions particular to a specific discipline and/or writing task (s) including organization, content, presentation, formatting, and stylistic choices Demonstrates consistent use of important conventions particular to a specific discipline and/or writing task(s), including organization, content, presentation, and stylistic choices Follows expectations appropriate to a specific discipline and/or writing task(s) for basic organization, content, and presentation Attempts to use a consistent system for basic organization and presentation Sources and evidence Demonstrates skillful use of high quality, credible, relevant sources to develop ideas that are appropriate for the discipline and genre of the writing Demonstrates consistent use of credible, relevant sources to support ideas that are situated within the discipline and genre of the writing. Demonstrates an attempt to use credible and/or relevant sources to support ideas that are appropriate for the discipline and genre of the writing. Demonstrates an attempt to use sources to support ideas in the writing. Control of syntax and mechanics Uses graceful language that skillfully communicates meaning to readers with clarity and fluency, and is virtually error-free. Uses straightforward language that generally conveys meaning to readers. The language in the portfolio has few errors. Uses language that generally conveys meaning to readers with clarity, although writing may include some errors. Uses language that sometimes impedes meaning because of errors in usage READING VALUE RUBRIC
- 72. 72 for more information,please contact value@aacu.org Definition Reading is "the process of simultaneously extracting and constructing meaning through interaction and involvement with written language" (Snow et al, 2002). (From http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB8024/index1.html) Framing Language To paraphrase Phaedrus, texts do not explain, nor answer questions about, themselves. They must be located, approached, decoded, comprehended, analyzed, interpreted, and discussed, especially complex academic texts used in college and university classrooms for purposes of learning. Historically, college professors have not considered the teaching of reading necessary other than as a "basic skill" in which students may require "remediation." They have assumed that students come with the ability to read and have placed responsibility for its absence on teachers in elementary and secondary schools. This absence of reading instruction in higher education must, can, and will change, and this rubric marks a direction for this change. Why the change? Even the strongest, most experienced readers making the transition from high school to college have not learned what they need to know and do to make sense of texts in the context of professional and academic scholarship--to say nothing about readers who are either not as strong or as experienced. Also, readers mature and develop their repertoire of reading performances naturally during the undergraduate years and beyond as a consequence of meeting textual challenges. This rubric provides some initial steps toward finding ways to measure undergraduate students' progress along the continuum. Our intention in creating this rubric is to support and promote the teaching of undergraduates as readers to take on increasingly higher levels of concerns with texts and to read as one of “those who comprehend.” Readers, as they move beyond their undergraduate experiences, should be motivated to approach texts and respond to them with a reflective level of curiosity and the ability to apply aspects of the texts they approach to a variety of aspects in their lives. This rubric provides the framework for evaluating both students' developing relationship to texts and their relative success with the range of texts their coursework introduces them to. It is likely that users of this rubric will detect that the cell boundaries are permeable, and the criteria of the rubric are, to a degree, interrelated. Glossary The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. • Analysis: The process of recognizing and using features of a text to build a more advanced understanding of the meaning of a text. (Might include evaluation of genre, language, tone, stated purpose, explicit or implicit logic (including flaws of reasoning), and historical context as they contribute to the meaning of a text.] • Comprehension: The extent to which a reader "gets" the text, both literally and figuratively. Accomplished and sophisticated readers will have moved from being able to "get" the meaning that the language of the text provides to being able to "get" the implications of the text, the questions it raises, and the counterarguments one might suggest in response to it. A helpful and accessible discussion of 'comprehension' is found in Chapter 2 of the RAND report, Reading for Understanding: http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1465/MR1465.ch2.pdf.
- 73. 73 • Epistemological lens:The knowledge framework a reader develops in a specific discipline as s/he moves through an academic major (e.g. essays, textbook chapters, literary works, journal articles, lab reports, grant proposals, lectures, blogs, webpages, or literature reviews, for example). The depth and breadth of this knowledge provides the foundation for independent and self-regulated responses to the range of texts in any discipline or field that students will encounter. • Genre: A particular kind of "text" defined by a set of disciplinary conventions or agreements learned through participation in academic discourse. Genre governs what texts can be about, how they are structured, what to expect from them , what can be done with them, how to use them • Interpretation: Determining or construing the meaning of a text or part of a text in a particular way based on textual and contextual information. • Interpretive Strategies: Purposeful approaches from different perspectives, which include, for example, asking clarifying questions, building knowledge of the context in which a text was written, visualizing and considering counterfactuals (asking questions that challenge the assumptions or claims of the text, e.g., What might our country be like if the Civil War had not happened? How would Hamlet be different if Hamlet had simply killed the King?). • Multiple Perspectives: Consideration of how text-based meanings might differ depending on point of view. • Parts: Titles, headings, meaning of vocabulary from context, structure of the text, important ideas and relationships among those ideas. • Relationship to text: The set of expectations and intentions a reader brings to a particular text or set of texts. • Searches intentionally for relationships: An active and highly-aware quality of thinking closely related to inquiry and research. • Takes texts apart: Discerns the level of importance or abstraction of textual elements and sees big and small pieces as parts of the whole meaning (compare to Analysis above). • Metacognition: This is not a word that appears explicitly anywhere in the rubric, but it is implicit in a number of the descriptors, and is certainly a term that we find frequently in discussions of successful and rich learning.. Metacognition, (a term typically attributed to the cognitive psychologist J.H. Flavell) applied to reading refers to the awareness, deliberateness, and reflexivity defining the activities and strategies that readers must control in order to work their ways effectively through different sorts of texts, from lab reports to sonnets, from math texts to historical narratives, or from grant applications to graphic novels, for example. Metacognition refers here as well to an accomplished reader’s ability to consider the ethos reflected in any such text; to know that one is present and should be considered in any use of, or response to a text.
- 74. 74 READING VALUE RUBRIC formore information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Reading is "the process of simultaneously extracting and constructing meaning through interaction and involvement with written language" (Snow et al, 2002). (From http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB8024/index1.html) Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Comprehension Recognizes possible implications of the text for contexts, perspectives or issues beyond the assigned task within the classroom or beyond the author’s explicit message (e.g., might recognize broader issues at play, or might pose challenges to the author’s message and presentation). Uses the text, general background knowledge and/or specific knowledge of the author’s context to draw more complex inferences about the author’s message and attitude. Evaluates how textual features (e.g., sentence and paragraph structure or tone) contribute to the author’s message; draws basic inferences about context and purpose of text. Apprehends vocabulary appropriately to paraphrase or summarize the information the text communicates. Genres Uses ability to identify texts within and across genres, monitoring and adjusting reading strategies and expectations based on generic nuances of particular texts. Articulates distinctions among genres and their characteristic conventions. Reflects on reading experiences across a variety of genres, reading both with and against the grain experimentally and intentionally. Applies tacit genre knowledge to a variety of classroom reading assignments in productive, if unreflective, ways. Relationship to text Making meanings with texts in their contexts Evaluates texts for scholarly significance and relevance within and across the various disciplines, evaluating them according to their contributions and consequences. Uses texts in the context of scholarship to develop a foundation of disciplinary knowledge and to raise and explore important questions. Engages texts with the intention and expectation of building topical and world knowledge. Approaches texts in the context of assignments with the intention and expectation of finding right answers and learning facts and concepts to display for credit. Analysis Interacting with Texts in Parts and as Wholes Evaluates strategies for relating ideas, text structure or other textual features in order to build knowledge or insight within and across texts and disciplines. Identifies relations among ideas, text structure, or other textual features, to evaluate how they support an advanced understanding of the text as a whole. Recognizes relations among parts or aspects of a text, such as effective or ineffective arguments or literary features, in considering how these contribute to a basic understanding of the text as a Identifies aspects of a text (e.g., content, structure or relations among ideas) as needed to respond to questions posed in assigned tasks.
- 75. 75 whole. Interpretation Making Sense withTexts as Blueprints for Meaning Provides evidence not only that s/he can read by using an appropriate epistemological lens but that s/he can also engage in reading as part of a continuing dialogue within and beyond a discipline or a community of readers. Articulates an understanding of the multiple ways of reading and the range of interpretive strategies particular to one's discipline(s) or in a given community of readers. Demonstrates that s/he can read purposefully, choosing among interpretive strategies depending on the purpose of the reading. Can identify purpose(s) for reading, relying on an external authority such as an instructor for clarification of the task. Reader's Voice Participating in Academic Discourse about Texts Discusses texts with an independent intellectual and ethical disposition so as to further or maintain disciplinary conversations. Elaborates on the texts (through interpretation or questioning) so as to deepen or enhance an ongoing discussion. Discusses texts in structured conversations (such as in a classroom) in ways that contribute to a basic, shared understanding of the text.. Comments about texts in ways that preserve the author's meanings and link them to the assignment
- 76. 76 FOUNDATIONS AND SKILLSFOR LIFELONG LEARNING VALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Lifelong learning is “all purposeful learning activity, undertaken on an ongoing basis with the aim of improving knowledge, skills and competence”. An endeavor of higher education is to prepare students to be this type of learner by developing specific dispositions and skills described in this rubric while in school. (From The European Commission (2000). Commission staff working paper: A memorandum on lifelong learning. Retrieved September 3, 2003, from http://www.see-educoop.net/education_in/pdf/lifelong-oth-enl-t02.pdf.) Framing Language This rubric is designed to assess the skills and dispositions involved in lifelong learning, which are curiosity, transfer, independence, initiative, and reflection. Assignments that encourage students to reflect on how they incorporated their lifelong learning skills into their work samples or collections of work by applying above skills and dispositions will provide the means for assessing those criteria. Work samples or collections of work tell what is known or can be done by students, while reflections tell what students think or feel or perceive. Reflection provides the evaluator with a much better understanding of who students are because through reflection students share how they feel about or make sense of their learning experiences. Reflection allows analysis and interpretation of the work samples or collections of work for the reader. Reflection also allows exploration of alternatives, the consideration of future plans, and provides evidence related to students' growth and development. Perhaps the best fit for this rubric are those assignments that prompt the integration of experience beyond the classroom.
- 77. 77 FOUNDATIONS AND SKILLSFOR LIFELONG LEARNING VALUE RUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Lifelong learning is “all purposeful learning activity, undertaken on an ongoing basis with the aim of improving knowledge, skills and competence”. An endeavor of higher education is to prepare students to be this type of learner by developing specific dispositions and skills (described in this rubric) while in school. (From The European Commission (2000). Commission staff working paper: A memorandum on lifelong learning. Retrieved September 3, 2003, from http://www.see-educoop.net/education_in/pdf/lifelong-oth-enl- t02.pdf.) Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Curiosity Explores a topic in depth yielding a rich awareness and/or little known information indicating intense interest in the subject. Explores a topic in depth, yielding insight and/or information indicating interest in the subject. Explores a topic with some evidence of depth, providing occasional insight and/or information indicating mild interest in the subject. Explores a topic at a surface level, providing little insight and/or information beyond the very basic facts indicating low interest in the subject. Initiative Completes required work, generates and pursues opportunities to expand knowledge, skills, and abilities. Completes required work, identifies and pursues opportunities to expand knowledge, skills, and abilities. Completes required work and identifies opportunities to expand knowledge, skills, and abilities. Completes required work. Independence Educational interests and pursuits exist and flourish outside classroom requirements. Knowledge and/or experiences are pursued independently. Beyond classroom requirements, pursues substantial, additional knowledge and/or actively pursues independent educational experiences Beyond classroom requirements, pursues additional knowledge and/or shows interest in pursuing independent educational experiences Begins to look beyond classroom requirements, showing interest in pursuing knowledge independently Transfer Makes explicit references to previous learning and applies in an innovative (new & creative) way that knowledge and those skills to demonstrate comprehension and Makes references to previous learning and shows evidence of applying that knowledge and those skills to demonstrate comprehension and performance in novel situations. Makes references to previous learning and attempts to apply that knowledge and those skills to demonstrate comprehension and performance in novel Makes vague references to previous learning but does not apply knowledge and skills to demonstrate comprehension and performance in novel situations.
- 78. 78 performance in novel situations. situations. ReflectionReviews prior learning (past experiences inside and outside of the classroom) in depth to reveal significantly changed perspectives about educational and life experiences, which provide foundation for expanded knowledge, growth, and maturity over time. Reviews prior learning (past experiences inside and outside of the classroom) in depth, revealing fully clarified meanings or indicating broader perspectives about educational or life events. Reviews prior learning (past experiences inside and outside of the classroom) with some depth, revealing slightly clarified meanings or indicating a somewhat broader perspectives about educational or life events. Reviews prior learning (past experiences inside and outside of the classroom) at a surface level, without revealing clarified meaning or indicating a broader perspective about educational or life events.
- 79. 79 GLOBAL LEARNING VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Global learning is a critical analysis of and an engagement with complex, interdependent global systems and legacies (such as natural, physical, social, cultural, economic, and political) and their implications for people’s lives and the earth’s sustainability. Through global learning, students should 1) become informed, open-minded, and responsible people who are attentive to diversity across the spectrum of differences, 2) seek to understand how their actions affect both local and global communities, and 3) address the world’s most pressing and enduring issues collaboratively and equitably. Framing Language Effective and transformative global learning offers students meaningful opportunities to analyze and explore complex global challenges, collaborate respectfully with diverse others, apply learning to take responsible action in contemporary global contexts, and evaluate the goals, methods, and consequences of that action. Global learning should enhance students’ sense of identity, community, ethics, and perspective-taking. Global learning is based on the principle that the world is a collection of interdependent yet inequitable systems and that higher education has a vital role in expanding knowledge of human and natural systems, privilege and stratification, and sustainability and development to foster individuals’ ability to advance equity and justice at home and abroad. Global learning cannot be achieved in a single course or a single experience but is acquired cumulatively across students’ entire college career through an institution’s curricular and co-curricular programming. As this rubric is designed to assess global learning on a programmatic level across time, the benchmarks (levels 1-4) may not be directly applicable to a singular experience, course, or assignment. Depending on the context, there may be development within one level rather than growth from level to level. We encourage users of the Global Learning Rubric to also consult three other closely related VALUE Rubrics: Civic Engagement, Intercultural Knowledge and Competence, and Ethical Reasoning. Glossary The definitions that follow were developed to clarify terms and concepts used in this rubric only. Global Self-Awareness: in the context of global learning, the continuum through which students develop a mature, integrated identity with a systemic understanding of the interrelationships among the self, local and global communities, and the natural and physical world. Perspective Taking: the ability to engage and learn from perspectives and experiences different from one’s own and to understand how one’s place in the world both informs and limits one’s knowledge. The goal is to develop the capacity to understand the interrelationships between multiple perspectives, such as personal, social, cultural, disciplinary, environmental, local, and global. Cultural Diversity: the ability to recognize the origins and influences of one’s own cultural heritage along with its limitations in providing all that one needs to know in the world. This includes the curiosity to learn respectfully about the cultural diversity of other people and on an individual level to traverse cultural boundaries to bridge differences and collaboratively reach common goals. On a systems level, the important skill of comparatively analyzing how cultures can be marked and assigned a place within power structures that determine hierarchies, inequalities, and opportunities and which can vary over time and place. This can include, but is not limited to, understanding race, ethnicity, gender, nationhood, religion, and class. Personal and Social Responsibility: the ability to recognize one’s responsibilities to society--locally, nationally, and globally--and to develop a perspective on ethical and power relations both across the globe and within individual societies. This requires developing competence in ethical and moral reasoning and action.
- 80. 80 Global Systems: thecomplex and overlapping worldwide systems, including natural systems (those systems associated with the natural world including biological, chemical, and physical sciences) and human systems (those systems developed by humans such as cultural, economic, political, and built), which operate in observable patterns and often are affected by or are the result of human design or disruption. These systems influence how life is lived and what options are open to whom. Students need to understand how these systems 1) are influenced and/or constructed, 2) operate with differential consequences, 3) affect the human and natural world, and 4) can be altered. Knowledge Application: in the context of global learning, the application of an integrated and systemic understanding of the interrelationships between contemporary and past challenges facing cultures, societies, and the natural world (i.e., contexts) on the local and global levels. An ability to apply knowledge and skills gained through higher learning to real-life problem-solving both alone and with others.
- 81. 81 GLOBAL LEARNING VALUERUBRIC for more information, please contact value@aacu.org Definition Global learning is a critical analysis of and an engagement with complex, interdependent global systems and legacies (such as natural, physical, social, cultural, economic, and political) and their implications for people’s lives and the earth’s sustainability. Through global learning, students should 1) become informed, open-minded, and responsible people who are attentive to diversity across the spectrum of differences, 2) seek to understand how their actions affect both local and global communities, and 3) address the world’s most pressing and enduring issues collaboratively and equitably. Evaluators are encouraged to assign a zero to any work sample or collection of work that does not meet benchmark (cell one) level performance. Capstone 4 Milestones 3 2 Benchmark 1 Global Self-Awareness Effectively addresses significant issues in the natural and human world based on articulating one’s identity in a global context. Evaluates the global impact of one’s own and others’ specific local actions on the natural and human world. Analyzes ways that human actions influence the natural and human world. Identifies some connections between an individual’s personal decision-making and certain local and global issues. Perspective Taking Evaluates and applies diverse perspectives to complex subjects within natural and human systems in the face of multiple and even conflicting positions (i.e. cultural, disciplinary, and ethical.) Synthesizes other perspectives (such as cultural, disciplinary, and ethical) when investigating subjects within natural and human systems. Identifies and explains multiple perspectives (such as cultural, disciplinary, and ethical) when exploring subjects within natural and human systems. Identifies multiple perspectives while maintaining a value preference for own positioning (such as cultural, disciplinary, and ethical). Cultural Diversity Adapts and applies a deep understanding of multiple worldviews, experiences, and power structures while initiating meaningful interaction with other cultures to address significant global problems. Analyzes substantial connections between the worldviews, power structures, and experiences of multiple cultures historically or in contemporary contexts, incorporating respectful interactions with other cultures. Explains and connects two or more cultures historically or in contemporary contexts with some acknowledgement of power structures, demonstrating respectful interaction with varied cultures and worldviews. Describes the experiences of others historically or in contemporary contexts primarily through one cultural perspective, demonstrating some openness to varied cultures and worldviews. Personal and Social Responsibility Takes informed and responsible action to address ethical, social, and environmental challenges in global systems and Analyzes the ethical, social, and environmental consequences of global systems and identifies a range of actions informed by one’s sense of personal and civic Explains the ethical, social, and environmental consequences of local and national decisions on global systems. Identifies basic ethical dimensions of some local or national decisions that have global impact.
- 82. 82 evaluates the localand broader consequences of individual and collective interventions. responsibility. Understanding Global Systems Uses deep knowledge of the historic and contemporary role and differential effects of human organizations and actions on global systems to develop and advocate for informed, appropriate action to solve complex problems in the human and natural worlds. Analyzes major elements of global systems, including their historic and contemporary interconnections and the differential effects of human organizations and actions, to pose elementary solutions to complex problems in the human and natural worlds. Examines the historical and contemporary roles, interconnections, and differential effects of human organizations and actions on global systems within the human and the natural worlds. Identifies the basic role of some global and local institutions, ideas, and processes in the human and natural worlds. Applying Knowledge to Contemporary Global Contexts Applies knowledge and skills to implement sophisticated, appropriate, and workable solutions to address complex global problems using interdisciplinary perspectives independently or with others. Plans and evaluates more complex solutions to global challenges that are appropriate to their contexts using multiple disciplinary perspectives (such as cultural, historical, and scientific). Formulates practical yet elementary solutions to global challenges that use at least two disciplinary perspectives (such as cultural, historical, and scientific). Defines global challenges in basic ways, including a limited number of perspectives and solutions.